Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
Top News
Top News
Politics

California Governor Vetoes Bill For Black Property Reparations

California's Governor

California Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed a bill aimed at assisting Black families in reclaiming or receiving compensation for property unjustly taken by the government. The bill sought to establish a process for families to file claims if they believed their property was seized through eminent domain due to discriminatory motives without fair compensation.

The veto was a setback for a reparations package supported by the California Legislative Black Caucus to address historical racial injustices. The proposed bill was part of a broader effort to rectify decades of policies that perpetuated racial disparities for Black Americans.

The vetoed bill, introduced by a Democratic state senator, was inspired by a case where Los Angeles officials returned a beachfront property to a Black couple a century after it was taken from their ancestors through eminent domain. The senator emphasized the importance of addressing historic wrongs through reparations.

The bill aimed to address historical racial injustices through reparations.
Governor Newsom vetoed a bill assisting Black families in property compensation.
Legislative Black Caucus supported the reparations package in California.

However, the bill faced challenges as other reparations-related bills, including the creation of a reparations agency and fund, did not advance in the legislative process. Concerns were raised about oversight and funding for the proposed agency, leading to its blockage by caucus members.

The Newsom administration's opposition to the eminent domain bill was based on budgetary concerns, with estimated costs ranging from hundreds of thousands to low millions annually for implementation. The administration had proposed allocating funds for a study on reparations instead of creating the agency.

While the vetoed bill acknowledged past racial injustices, its implementation was deemed unfeasible due to the absence of a designated state agency to oversee its provisions. The decision reflects the complexities and challenges in addressing historical injustices through legislative measures.

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.