Black leaders want Maryland Gov. Wes Moore held accountable, say racial wealth gap can't end without reparations
BALTIMORE — Though Gov. Wes Moore announced actions toward ending the racial wealth gap Thursday, members of the Maryland Legislative Black Caucus say that cannot truly happen without discussing reparations.
'I don't think there is a bold Black agenda that does not include reparations,' Chrissy Thornton, the president and CEO of Associated Black Charities, said at a virtual town hall meeting of the Legislative Black Caucus Tuesday. 'There is no settling of the racial wealth gap without it.'
In recognition of Juneteenth, Moore, a Democrat and Maryland's first Black governor, announced that he would be issuing nearly 7,000 more pardons for cases of simple cannabis possession, and is directing $400 million to communities that have historically been disinvested in by discriminatory policies.
But members of Maryland's Legislative Black Caucus remain frustrated with Moore, who in May vetoed legislation that would have established the Maryland Reparations Commission.
'We should not be confused that an actual reparations agenda is disruptive to the political status quo,' said Dayvon Love, the director of public policy at Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle, said at Tuesday's Town Hall.
Del. Jheanelle Wilkins, a Montgomery County Democrat and chair of the Legislative Black Caucus, said that the caucus made its 'first ever historic call' to take action on reparations policy during the 2025 legislative session.
The bill would have launched a two-year study into whether the state should provide reparations to Marylanders impacted by the state's history of slavery and racial inequity.
The legislation, which was a priority of Maryland's Legislative Black Caucus, received broad Democratic support in both chambers of the Maryland General Assembly, and would not have provided any immediate benefit — financial or otherwise — to impacted Marylanders.
The Maryland General Assembly will have the opportunity to override Moore's veto when it next convenes.
Thornton warned the caucus not to pull back on holding Moore accountable just because he is Black.
'I think we need to push as forcefully as possible against what's happened with this veto, to have it overturned as we would if it was anyone else in elected office,' she said. 'I think we're in a moment where we have to be courageous and speak to accountability — no matter who's in the seat.'
Moore said Thursday that he 'doesn't need any lectures' on the history of racism in the state of Maryland, and that the state has done four studies and commissions on these types of issues 'over the past 25 years, alone' — one of which First Lady Dawn Flythe Moore worked on.
'I have a fundamental disagreement with the General Assembly on what's required inside this moment,' he said. 'I believe this is a moment for action. I believe that this is a moment for action. I believe that this is a moment where we want to put together policies that are actually helping to address the harm that was … historically done.'
Wilkins said that, though slavery ended 160 years ago, Maryland has never explicitly examined the issue of reparations, the harms of Jim Crow laws, enslavement and redlining.
'Our community called on us to take action on the issue of reparations,' she said. 'Repair is about progress, and it's long overdue.'
---------------
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
Biden Diplomat: American Public Not Ready for Iran Intervention
"There's no question that the American public is not ready, has not been prepared, by the president or his administration for the prospect of US military intervention in Iran," says Barbara Leaf, former US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. Leaf suggests the fear is now that Israel's war aims have shifted from destroying Iran's nuclear program and attriting its military to regime change. "That opens up a Pandora's box of possibilities," she adds. (Source: Bloomberg)
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
Analysis: Why does the US want to deport this man?
The Trump administration's immigration crackdown is reaching every American who sees protesters skirmishing with police on the news or video of masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents raiding Home Depot parking lots in their social media feeds. On Tuesday, New York City comptroller and mayoral candidate Brad Lander was arrested by federal officers, some wearing masks, as he tried to accompany a migrant after an immigration court hearing. But there are countless stories that will touch Americans in their daily lives. Anyone who takes the time to look will find the immigration crackdown right next to them. That's what I found — at two degrees of separation — when I heard from a friend that her child's special needs aide's father, Arthur Newmark, was detained after being in the US for 10 years while he sought asylum from Russia. Newmark's lawyer says he did everything by the book as he sought asylum, filing paperwork in 2015 while he was in the country legally. It wasn't until last month, days after an asylum hearing with US Citizenship and Information Services, that Newmark was detained. ICE placed him into custody and took jurisdiction of his case from the asylum office. Newmark was detained by ICE agents on May 31 after he went outside his Northern Virginia home with his pet bird, Bernie. The agents told Newmark's wife, Kristina, to collect Bernie the bird, along with her husband's wallet and phone. The agents left with Newmark and took him to a detention facility in rural Virginia. It was only after his detention began that Newmark's family and lawyer learned ICE is now saying that he had overstayed his visa by 10 years. His lawyer vehemently disagrees. The Newmarks say they have legitimate fears for their lives in Russia; their lawyer Elizabeth Krukova showed me what appears to be a posting for Arthur on a registry of wanted persons there and said he came to the US because 'he was exposing corruption in Russia at the highest levels.' The entire family legally changed their names after living for three years in the United States. They argue they have followed the rules while seeking asylum and building their lives in Virginia, but now Newmark could face the possibility of deportation. It's not clear exactly why Arthur Newmark was taken into custody or why, after 10 years, the US government has now determined, days after his long-awaited asylum interview, that he had actually overstayed his visa. It was at that interview that Newmark, over the course of six hours, explained to immigration officials the danger he faces in Russia. I reached out to US Citizenship and Immigration Services to comment on Newmark's case. It declined to comment and referred me to ICE, which has not yet responded. Newmark's lawyer still says he has a strong asylum case, but the family's life has been turned upside down while he spent weeks inside a detention facility. His Russian-born children, one of whom is in college and one of whom just graduated from high school in Virginia, are now wondering if they'll be sent back to Russia, the country their parents fled, or somewhere else. A third child was born in the US. An immigration judge granted Newmark bond this week while his case proceeds, but now his wife and children have also been told to appear before an immigration judge in July, days before his next hearing. The asylum request was made in Newmark's name and the entire family has been living in immigration limbo. I spoke several times with the oldest daughter, Eva, a student at a community college who is studying to be a financial planner. She told me she chose to stay home and start a two-year college because she could pay tuition by the class instead of for a full year. 'If we get deported, I don't have to lose a lot of money,' she said. That's also partly why the family has not purchased a house in the US. 'Who wants a mortgage, if you don't know if you're going to stay in the country again, right?' Eva said in flawless English, as she translated for her mother, who speaks English, but not as fluently. While Arthur abandoned his Russian career as a lawyer when he came to the US — he has worked in trucking and in grocery stores — Kristina has built a business teaching music lessons. Her youngest son, an American citizen born in the US, has been successful in music competitions, she said. Arthur and Kristina initially came to the US in 2015 for her to have a medical procedure, but they were threatened in Moscow before leaving, according to Kristina. Arthur went back to Moscow through the border of another country, according to Eva, and arranged for the two Russian-born children to be flown to the US. They applied for asylum that same year, while in the US legally, and changed their names in 2018 to make it harder for them to be found by Russia. The Newmarks chose to seek asylum in the US believing that it would not deport them back to Russia. 'It was, first, opposite side of the world, and because we knew that this country has more rights and opportunities,' Kristina said. Even though 'this time is a little bit uncertain for the whole country,' Eva said, she still feels that in the US they can fight in court and have a lawyer represent them, which might not be the case in Russia. While the Newmarks' saga has been long and so far unresolved, the decade they have lived in the US without detention is not something more recent Russian asylum-seekers have experienced. The Newmarks came to the US in 2015, after Russia annexed Crimea but long before it invaded Ukraine. Thousands have fled Russia for the US since the invasion of Ukraine, frequently waiting at the border with Mexico for an opportunity to claim asylum. For most of President Joe Biden's administration, those asylees, many of them critics of Russian President Vladimir Putin, were allowed to enter the country, or 'paroled,' while their claims progressed through the system. Then, beginning in 2024, for reasons not entirely known, many ultimately found themselves spending a year or more in detention. A group of detainees sued the Biden administration, arguing that Russian speakers were being discriminated against. The lawyer who brought that suit, Curtis Morrison, told me the issue is essentially moot now since the Trump administration wants to detain anyone seeking asylum rather than let them live in the country as the Newmarks have. 'The Trump administration is taking the view that nobody gets that,' Morrison said. 'So basically, everybody's being subjected to what the Russians were subjected to a year ago.'
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
'I don't see any other way': Republicans push for gun tax cut in Trump's 'big, beautiful bill'
Inside President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill" are policy tweaks that would remove taxes and regulations on certain guns, but Senate Democrats aim to gut the changes from the bill. Tucked into the Senate Finance Committee's offering to the mammoth bill, which was unveiled earlier this week, are policy changes that would delist short-barrel rifles, shotguns and suppressors from the National Firearms Act (NFA). That means those particular guns and accessories would no longer be subject to a $200 federal tax and would no longer need to be registered with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The changes come from the Stop Harassing Owners of Rifles Today (SHORT) Act, a bill pushed by Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., in the upper chamber, and Rep. Andrew Clyde, R-Ga., in the House. Marshall told Fox News Digital he believed the gun language would make Trump's megabill "even more beautiful," while Clyde said in a statement the changes would "restore our Second Amendment rights." However, Democrats have vowed to inflict as much pain as possible on their Republican colleagues through the "Byrd Bath" process, which is when lawmakers and their staff work behind the scenes to ensure the litany of policy within the "big, beautiful bill" comports with the Byrd Rule that governs reconciliation. And the gun language is likely high on the chopping block for Senate Democrats. "Taxation and registration of firearms under the draconian NFA are inseparably linked," Clyde said in a statement to Fox News Digital. "I'm confident our pro-2A provision will survive the Byrd Rule, and I look forward to delivering this constitutional victory for the American people." Marshall, similarly, wasn't too concerned the provision would be scrubbed by Democrats in their Byrd Bath pursuit and noted, "That's what reconciliation bills are supposed to deal with, is taxes." He argued the Supreme Court upheld the NFA, which, despite being primarily a regulatory framework, does include an excise tax. The court upheld the NFA and the excise taxes it imposed as constitutional in the 1930s. More recently, the regulatory framework was upheld by the court in the Bruen decision in 2022. Still, Marshall viewed the filibuster-proof budget reconciliation process, which allows Republicans to pass Trump's mammoth bill with only 51 votes, as the only chance he and the GOP have to codify the changes to the NFA. "I don't see another way to do it," he said. "I mean, obviously it would take 60 votes. And, you know, I don't see any other way to make this actually happen." Meanwhile, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., declined to get into detail on the exact strategy he and other Democratic lawmakers would use to go after provisions buried in the broader reconciliation text. But he noted that the point of reconciliation is to focus on spending and budgetary effects and that "a lot of times you see Republicans, very conservative Republicans, try to convince the parliamentarian that something really is spending when it's really an ideological trophy." "I can tell you this, the Byrd Bath is the legislative equivalent of prolonged root canal work," Wyden told Fox News Digital. "It's detailed, we've begun it, I'm practiced in it. I've worked in this area for some time, and my staff is expecting to spend the whole rest of next week digging into it."
