This measure would acknowledge the harms and atrocities committed by representatives of the State of California who promoted, facilitated, enforced, and permitted the institution of chattel slavery and the legacy of ongoing badges and incidents of slavery that form the systemic structures of discrimination. The measure would affirm the State of Californias role in protecting the descendants of enslaved people as well as their civil, political, and socio-cultural rights.

This measure would acknowledge the harms and atrocities committed by representatives of the State of California who promoted, facilitated, enforced, and permitted the institution of chattel slavery and the legacy of ongoing badges and incidents of slavery that form the systemic structures of discrimination. The measure would affirm the State of Californias role in protecting the descendants of enslaved people as well as their civil, political, and socio-cultural rights.

WHEREAS, This resolution may be cited as the Acknowledgment of Gross Human Rights Violations and Crimes Against Humanity on African Slaves and their Descendants; and

WHEREAS, The State of Californiaits executive, judicial, and legislative branchesdenied African Americans their fundamental liberties and denied their humanity throughout the states history, from before the Civil War to the present; and

WHEREAS, Although California entered the Union in 1850 outlawing slavery, the California Supreme Court stated that the antislavery law in the California Constitution was only a declaration of a principle and did not enact laws to enforce this provision and emancipate slaves; and

WHEREAS, The California Supreme Court enforced the federal fugitive slave law until the official end of enslavement in 1865; and

WHEREAS, The State of California prevented African Americans from testifying in court against a white person until 1863; and

WHEREAS, The California Legislature opposed Congress Reconstruction civil rights laws and delayed ratifying the 14th and 15th Amendments to the federal constitution; and

WHEREAS, The State of California disenfranchised African American citizens through racial barriers to voting such as poll taxes and literacy tests; and

WHEREAS, The California Legislature prohibited interracial marriage and passed an anti-miscegenation law in its first legislative session in 1850. Interracial marriage was not allowed until 1959; The Legislature repeatedly refused to repeal the law after the California Supreme Court struck it down in 1948, and only did so 11 years later; and

WHEREAS, The State of California constructed monuments, memorials, state markers, and plaques memorializing and preserving confederate culture and glorifying slavery and white supremacy; and

WHEREAS, From the brutality of enslavement to contemporary police killings, state and local government-sanctioned violence, such as lynching, coercive sterilization, torture, and property destruction inflicted death, physical injuries, and psychological harms on African Americans in California; and

WHEREAS, The State of California openly allowed segregation and discrimination against African Americans with respect to musicians, workers, and artists; and

WHEREAS, State and local governments in California enacted restrictive zoning ordinances, licensing laws, fire and safety codes, and anti-nuisance laws to disrupt African American businesses and their customers; and

WHEREAS, Discriminatory housing policies including redlining, residential zoning ordinances, and loan practices have produced persistent and longstanding housing segregation and inequities in home ownership for African Americans in California; and

WHEREAS, State and local governments in California targeted property owned by African Americans in urban renewal and development projects for unjust uses of eminent domain, often without providing just compensation; and

WHEREAS, State and local segregation laws in California historically excluded African Americans from outdoor recreation, public transit, and other public infrastructure; and

WHEREAS, The eugenics movement thrived in California and thousands of African Americans were forcibly sterilized or were the subjects of medical experiments without consent; and

WHEREAS, Black Californians experience persistent discrimination in healthcare services and access through inaccurate diagnoses, use of involuntary force, high costs, and a lack of culturally competent services; and

WHEREAS, African Americans have been routinely excluded from professional careers in California. For example, African American physicians, psychologists, and psychiatrists are underrepresented in Californias medical fields, further exacerbating the inequities in the healthcare system; and

WHEREAS, Californias child welfare system has experienced some of the worst racial disparities in the country, with African American children suffering the highest rate of system involvement and correspondingly heightened risks and harms associated with entering foster care; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate of the State of California, the Assembly thereof concurring, That the State of California recognizes and accepts responsibility for all of the harms and atrocities committed by representatives of the state who promoted, facilitated, enforced, and permitted the institution of chattel slavery and its legacy of ongoing badges and incidents of slavery that form the systemic structures of discrimination; and be it further

Resolved, That the State of California now affirms its role in protecting the descendants of enslaved people as well as their civil, political, and socio-cultural rights; and be it further

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate transmit copies of this resolution to the author for appropriate distribution.

WHEREAS, This resolution may be cited as the Acknowledgment of Gross Human Rights Violations and Crimes Against Humanity on African Slaves and their Descendants; and

WHEREAS, The State of Californiaits executive, judicial, and legislative branchesdenied African Americans their fundamental liberties and denied their humanity throughout the states history, from before the Civil War to the present; and

WHEREAS, Although California entered the Union in 1850 outlawing slavery, the California Supreme Court stated that the antislavery law in the California Constitution was only a declaration of a principle and did not enact laws to enforce this provision and emancipate slaves; and

WHEREAS, The California Supreme Court enforced the federal fugitive slave law until the official end of enslavement in 1865; and

WHEREAS, The State of California prevented African Americans from testifying in court against a white person until 1863; and

WHEREAS, The California Legislature opposed Congress Reconstruction civil rights laws and delayed ratifying the 14th and 15th Amendments to the federal constitution; and

WHEREAS, The State of California disenfranchised African American citizens through racial barriers to voting such as poll taxes and literacy tests; and

WHEREAS, The California Legislature prohibited interracial marriage and passed an anti-miscegenation law in its first legislative session in 1850. Interracial marriage was not allowed until 1959; and

WHEREAS, The State of California constructed monuments, memorials, state markers, and plaques memorializing and preserving confederate culture and glorifying slavery and white supremacy; and

WHEREAS, From the brutality of enslavement to contemporary police killings, state and local government-sanctioned violence, such as lynching, coercive sterilization, torture, and property destruction inflicted death, physical injuries, and psychological harms on African Americans in California; and

WHEREAS, The State of California openly allowed segregation and discrimination against African Americans with respect to musicians, workers, and artists; and

WHEREAS, State and local governments in California enacted restrictive zoning ordinances, licensing laws, fire and safety codes, and anti-nuisance laws to disrupt African American businesses and their customers; and

WHEREAS, Discriminatory housing policies including redlining, residential zoning ordinances, and loan practices have produced persistent and longstanding housing segregation and inequities in home ownership for African Americans in California; and

WHEREAS, State and local governments in California targeted property owned by African Americans in urban renewal and development projects for unjust uses of eminent domain, often without providing just compensation; and

WHEREAS, State and local segregation laws in California historically excluded African Americans from outdoor recreation, public transit, and other public infrastructure; and

WHEREAS, The eugenics movement thrived in California and thousands of African Americans were forcibly sterilized or were the subjects of medical experiments without consent; and

WHEREAS, Black Californians experience persistent discrimination in healthcare services and access through inaccurate diagnoses, use of involuntary force, high costs, and a lack of culturally competent services; and

WHEREAS, African Americans have been routinely excluded from professional careers in California. For example, African American physicians, psychologists, and psychiatrists are underrepresented in Californias medical fields, further exacerbating the inequities in the healthcare system; and

WHEREAS, Californias child welfare system has experienced some of the worst racial disparities in the country, with African American children suffering the highest rate of system involvement and correspondingly heightened risks and harms associated with entering foster care; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate of the State of California, the Assembly thereof concurring, That the State of California recognizes and accepts responsibility for all of the harms and atrocities committed by representatives of the state who promoted, facilitated, enforced, and permitted the institution of chattel slavery and its legacy of ongoing badges and incidents of slavery that form the systemic structures of discrimination; and be it further

Resolved, That the State of California now affirms its role in protecting the descendants of enslaved people as well as their civil, political, and socio-cultural rights; and be it further

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate transmit copies of this resolution to the author for appropriate distribution.

SENATE THIRD READING

STR Bill Id:SCR 113

Author:(Smallwood-Cuevas)

As Amended Ver:February 21, 2024

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Recognizes and accepts responsibility for the harms and atrocities committed by representatives of the State of California who promoted, facilitated, enforced, and permitted the institution of chattel slavery and the legacy of ongoing badges and incidents of slavery that form the systemic structures of discrimination.

Major Provisions

1. Finds that WHEREAS the State of California has:
   1. Denied African Americans fundamental liberties and denied their humanity through the state's history, from before the Civil War to the present.
   2. Entered the Union as a free state but the California Supreme Court stated that this provision was only a "declaration of principle" and not enforceable.
   3. Enforced the federal fugitive slave law until 1865; opposed Reconstruction Era civil rights laws; delayed ratifying the 14th and 15th Amendments to the federal constitution; disfranchised African Americans through various mechanisms; prohibited inter-racial marriage until the mid-20th century; constructed monuments and memorials in honor of Confederate leaders and white supremacists.
   4. Inflicted government-sanctioned violence and psychological harm against African Americans, from the brutality of enslavement to contemporary police killings.
   5. Openly allowed segregation and discrimination against African Americans and disrupted African American businesses through, among other things, restrictive zoning ordinances, licensing laws, fire and safety codes, and anti-nuisance laws.
   6. Enacted, enforced, or tolerated discriminatory housing policies, including redlining, residential zoning laws, and loans practices that have led to both segregation and inequities in homeownership.
   7. Targeted property owned by African Americans for urban renewal projects and unjust uses of eminent domain.
   8. Created or contributed to policies and practices that led to, among other things, exclusion from public accommodations, the forced sterilization and medical experiments on thousands of African Americans, discriminatory and inadequate health care and child welfare services, and exclusion from the most prestigious and lucrative professions.
2. RESOLVES, in light of the above findings, that the State of California does the following:
   1. Recognizes and accepts responsibility for all of the harms and atrocities outlined above, including chattel slavery and its legacy of ongoing badges and incidents of slavery that form the systemic structures of discrimination.
   2. Affirms its role in protecting the descendants of enslaved people as well as their civil, political, and socio-cultural rights.

COMMENTS

Although California entered the Union as a "free state" in 1850, its entry indirectly helped Southern states maintain the institution of slavery. The "Compromise of 1850" allowed California to enter as a free state, but only on the condition that Congress strengthen the federal Fugitive Slave Act, which required that enslaved persons who escaped to Free States be returned to their "owner" in a slave state. The 1850 Act strengthened this law in part by requiring state and local officials in Free States to cooperate in this process of capture and re-enslavement. Because most enslaved African Americans in California in 1850 had not escaped from a slave state – but rather had been brought to California by their enslavers – the federal Fugitive Slave Act, in theory, should have had little impact in California. However, in 1852, California enacted its own state fugitive slave law to supplement the federal law. While the federal law created mechanisms to return persons who escaped slavery to their enslavers, the California law allowed enslavers who had willfully brought enslaved persons with them to California before it became a state to forcefully return them to the slave state. If the enslaved person had escaped while in California, that person could be declared a "fugitive slave" for purposes of both state and federal law, captured, and forced to return to the South with their enslaver.

In addition to the dangers of forced re-enslavement, African Americans in early California also endured several legal constraints, including, among other things, denial of the right to vote and prohibitions on testifying against whites in both criminal and civil trials. The denial of the right to testify was especially dangerous, as it affected the state fugitive slave law. For example, because state law permitted owners to reclaim and remove enslaved labor that had been brought into the state before 1850, an owner who came to California after 1850 could easily claim that they had come before. His enslaved labor could not offer testimony to the contrary. Inability to testify also meant that whites could commit crimes and breach contracts with African Americans with impunity, unless there were a white witness willing to testify against the white wrongdoer. On February 20, 1862, a group of Free Blacks petitioned the state legislature, praying that the members remove the prohibition on testimony. (In 1863, the Legislature repealed the prohibition as applied to African Americans, but allowed it to stand against Native Americans and persons of Chinese descent.)

An old adage rings true: the more things change, the more they remain the same. Like the petitioners in 1862, African Americans have continued to protest, file lawsuits, and change laws into the 20th and 21st centuries. Yet the successes brought about by the collective efforts of African Americans have too often met with reaction and setbacks. For example, in 1963 – one-hundred years after the Legislature repealed the ban on Black testimony – the Legislature enacted the Rumford Fair Housing Act, which prohibited racially-based discrimination in the sale or rental of residential housing. The legislation was named for its author, William Byron Rumford, one of the first African Americans to serve in the California Assembly, and reflected years of protest on the part of the Black community to challenge pervasive and institutionalized housing discrimination in California. The following year, 1964, California voters approved Proposition 14, a constitutional amendment that nullified the Rumford Fair Housing Act by declaring that a property owner had the right to "decline to sell, lease, or rent any part or all of his real property" to any person or persons "as he, in his absolute discretion, chooses." In short, the Proposition gave property owners a constitutional right to discriminate on the basis of race. Although the United States Supreme Court declared Proposition 14 unconstitutional in 1967 (thus restoring the Rumford Act), the overwhelming popular vote in support of the ballot measure suggested to many African Americans that even rare legislative victories were not safe. Indeed, the McCone Commission, which investigated the causes of the 1965 Watts Rebellion, counted the dashed expectations caused by Proposition 14 among the sources of frustration – though hardly the only one – that led to the uprising. (For a detailed discussion of Proposition 14 see Daniel Martinez HoSang, Racial Propositions: Ballot Initiatives and the Making of Postwar California (Berkeley: 2010), chapter 3.)

Findings and Recommendations of Reparations Task Force. The more than 1000-page Task Force report lays out both the past and continuing legacy of California laws and policy that were, according to the Task Force, designed to prevent African Americans in California from enjoying the full benefits of their citizenship. (The California Reparations Report, "Executive Summary," p. 48.) The section headings and chapter titles of the Report suggest the breathtaking range of laws and policies that have harmed African Americans: enslavement, racial terror, political disfranchisement, housing segregation, separate and unequal education, employment discrimination, and an unjust legal system that has led to unconscionable rates of incarceration for Black Californians. After laying out these findings of harm, the Report then examines international approaches to reparations and healing, from Germany, Chile, and South Africa, among others. These remedies can take the form of restitution, economic compensation, or programs of "rehabilitation," which could include an array of legal and social services or educational programs. The remaining parts of the Report suggest specific remedies for California, starting with a formal apology. Because "apologies alone are inadequate reparations for victims," the final sections of the Report make concrete policy recommendations, designed to provide true reparations for the harms documented in the Report. As the Report stresses on more than one occasion, the harms inflicted "have not been incidental or accidental," but are often the intentional result of "an all-encompassing web of discriminatory laws, regulations, and policies enacted by government." Therefore, addressing these wrongs will require changes in existing laws and the disruption of institutionalized patterns of racism.

While a formal apology and legislative remedies can be expected in subsequent bills, this resolution takes the preliminary and necessary step of first acknowledging and taking accountability for the harms enumerated in the Report.

According to the Author

This resolution is a long overdue acknowledgement of the ongoing harms of slavery in our state and nation. One of the most powerful aspects of the Reparations Tasks Force Report was the detailed discussion of how laws in California were crafted to directly cause harm to its Black residents. That harm touched every aspect of their lives and many of those harms are still felt by Black Californians generations later. This is why the Caucus' first step has been to introduce a resolution that recognizes that harm done against Black Californians.

Arguments in Support

The Alliance for Reparations, Reconciliation, and Truth (ARRT) is a newly-formed collaboration between the Black Equity Collective, the California Black Power Network, Catalyst California, Equal Justice Society, Live Free California, and former members of the California Reparations Task Force, writes in support:

While SCR 113 alone is not enough to repair the harm caused by California's role in U.S. chattel slavery and its vestiges, as detailed in the final report of the Task Force to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans, its passage would be a significant step towards "satisfaction" as defined under international human rights law. Harm cannot be repaired unless and until one acknowledges that it exists. The task force's over 1,100-page report details the harm done by the State of California in maintaining and enforcing the institution of slavery and, even upon its dissolution, continuing to cause harm to Black communities throughout the State of California.

In short, SCR 113 is an important step to righting a centuries-long wrong. California not only has an opportunity to become the first State in the nation to finally formally recognize and acknowledge the harms and atrocities caused by its role in U.S. chattel slavery and its vestiges, but it would also affirm the State of California's role in protecting the descendants of enslaved people as well as the civil, political, and socio-cultural rights of Black Californians, particularly during a time when the rights of minority and traditionally underrepresented groups are being targeted, attacked, and devalued.

Arguments in Opposition

No opposition on file.

FISCAL COMMENTS

None

VOTES

SENATE FLOOR: 31-1-8

YES: Allen, Alvarado-Gil, Archuleta, Ashby, Becker, Blakespear, Bradford, Caballero, Cortese, Dodd, Durazo, Eggman, Glazer, Gonzalez, Hurtado, Laird, Limón, McGuire, Menjivar, Min, Newman, Padilla, Portantino, Roth, Rubio, Skinner, Smallwood-Cuevas, Stern, Umberg, Wahab, Wiener

NO: Nguyen

ABS, ABST OR NV: Atkins, Dahle, Grove, Jones, Niello, Ochoa Bogh, Seyarto, Wilk

ASM JUDICIARY: 10-0-2

YES: Kalra, Bauer-Kahan, Bryan, Connolly, Haney, Maienschein, McKinnor, Pacheco, Reyes, Waldron

ABS, ABST OR NV: Dixon, Sanchez

UPDATED

VERSION: February 21, 2024

CONSULTANT: Tom Clark / JUD. / (916) 319-2334 FN: 0002683

Date of Hearing: April 2, 2024

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

Ash Kalra, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SCR 113

Author:(Smallwood-Cuevas) – As Amended Ver:February 21, 2024

SENATE VOTE: 31-1

SUBJECT: Human rights violations and crimes against humanity on African slaves and their descendants

KEY ISSUE: SHOULD THE LEGISLATURE ACKNOWLEDGE THE FINDINGS OF THE REPARATIONS TASK FORCE AND RECOGNIZE AND ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE HISTORICAL AND CONTINUING HARMS THAT CALIFORNIA LAW AND POLICY HAVE IMPOSED UPON ENSLAVED AFRICAN AMERICANS AND THEIR DESCENDANTS?

SYNOPSIS

Fifty-six years ago the late historian John Hope Franklin, a pioneer in the field of African American History, wrote the following: “If the house is to be set in order, one cannot begin with the present; he must begin with the past.” (John Hope Franklin, “Rediscovering Black America,” New York Times, September 8, 1968). With AB 3121 (Chap. 319, Stats. 2020), California belatedly confronted parts of its past and created the Task Force to Study and Develop Reparations Proposals for African Americans (Task Force). The legislation required the Task Force to gather and synthesize the documentary evidence of slavery and its ongoing legacy in California, develop ways to educate Californians about its findings, and recommend appropriate remedies in a report to the Legislature. The Task Force released its final “California Reparations Report” (Report) on June 29, 2023. Among other things, the Report recounted the historical harms committed against African Americans nationally and in California; discussed the international standards that have developed to remedy the wrongs done to other groups and in other places; and recommended general and specific remedies, including forms of compensation, restitution, and rehabilitation that should be afforded to the descendants of enslaved African Americans living in California today. Part III of the Report included a recommendation that California offer “a formal apology on behalf of the people of California for the perpetration of gross human rights violations and crimes against humanity on African slaves and their descendants.”

This resolution is not for the purpose of offering such a formal apology; rather, this resolution takes the first step of acknowledging and accepting responsibility for the harms and atrocities set forth in the findings of the Report. A separate measure will issue the formal apology, and other proposed legislation will seek to implement the more specific policy proposals set forth in the Report. This measure is supported by the Alliance for Reparations, Reconciliation, and Truth, among others. There is no opposition. The resolution is virtually identical to Assembly’s version, ACR 135, which the Committee heard and passed earlier this session.

SUMMARY: Recognizes and accepts responsibility for the harms and atrocities committed by representatives of the State of California who promoted, facilitated, enforced, and permitted the institution of chattel slavery and the legacy of ongoing badges and incidents of slavery that form the systemic structures of discrimination. Specifically this resolution:

1. Finds that WHEREAS the State of California has:
   1. Denied African Americans fundamental liberties and denied their humanity through the state’s history, from before the Civil War to the present.
   2. Entered the Union as a free state but the California Supreme Court stated that this provision was only a “declaration of principle” and not enforceable.
   3. Enforced the federal fugitive slave law until 1865; opposed Reconstruction Era civil rights laws; delayed ratifying the 14^th and 15^th Amendments to the federal constitution; disfranchised African Americans through various mechanisms; prohibited inter-racial marriage until the mid-20^th century; constructed monuments and memorials in honor of Confederate leaders and white supremacists.
   4. Inflicted government-sanctioned violence and psychological harm against African Americans, from the brutality of enslavement to contemporary police killings.
   5. Openly allowed segregation and discrimination against African Americans and disrupted African American businesses through, among other things, restrictive zoning ordinances, licensing laws, fire and safety codes, and anti-nuisance laws.
   6. Enacted, enforced, or tolerated discriminatory housing policies, including redlining, residential zoning laws, and loans practices that have led to both segregation and inequities in homeownership.
   7. Targeted property owned by African Americans for urban renewal projects and unjust uses of eminent domain.
   8. Created or contributed to policies and practices that led to, among other things, exclusion from public accommodations, the forced sterilization and medical experiments on thousands of African Americans, discriminatory and inadequate health care and child welfare services, and exclusion from the most prestigious and lucrative professions.
2. RESOLVES, in light of the above findings, that the State of California does the following:
   1. Recognizes and accepts responsibility for all of the harms and atrocities outlined above, including chattel slavery and its legacy of ongoing badges and incidents of slavery that form the systemic structures of discrimination.
   2. Affirms its role in protecting the descendants of enslaved people as well as their civil, political, and socio-cultural rights.

EXISTING LAW: Established, until July 1, 2023, the Task Force to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans, with a Special Consideration for African Americans Who are Descendants of Persons Enslaved in the United States, consisting of nine members, appointed as provided. Required the Task Force to, among other things, identify, compile, and synthesize the relevant corpus of evidentiary documentation of the institution of slavery that existed within the United States and the colonies; recommend the form of compensation that should be awarded, the instrumentalities through which it should be awarded, and who should be eligible for this compensation; submit a written report of its findings and recommendations to the Legislature. (Government Code Sections 8301-8301.7.)

FISCAL EFFECT: As currently in print this measure is keyed non-fiscal.

COMMENTS: Slavery and its legacy in a “free” state. Although California entered the Union as a “free state” in 1850, its entry indirectly helped Southern states maintain the institution of slavery. The “Compromise of 1850” allowed California to enter as a free state, but only on the condition that Congress strengthen the federal Fugitive Slave Act, which required that enslaved persons who escaped to Free States be returned to their “owner” in a slave state. The 1850 Act strengthened this law in part by requiring state and local officials in Free States to cooperate in this process of capture and re-enslavement. Because most enslaved African Americans in California in 1850 had not escaped from a slave state – but rather had been brought to California by their enslavers – the federal Fugitive Slave Act, in theory, should have had little impact in California. However, in 1852 California enacted its own state fugitive slave law to supplement the federal law. While the federal law created mechanisms to return persons who escaped slavery to their enslavers, the California law allowed enslavers who had willfully brought enslaved persons with them to California before it became a state to forcefully return them to the slave state. If the enslaved person had escaped while in California, that person could be declared a “fugitive slave” for purposes of both state and federal law, captured, and forced to return to the South with their enslaver.

In the one of the first cases brought under the state fugitive slave law, three enslaved men had previously reached an agreement with their enslaver to the effect that they would be granted their freedom after working for a specified period of time. The three men eventually won their freedom and worked for themselves for a time, and the enslaver returned home to his Southern state without them. However, when the enslaver learned of the 1852 law, he claimed that the three men had escaped and hired an agent to seek their return under the California law. The California Supreme Court sided with the enslaver, holding in part that the provision of the state constitution abolishing slavery was merely aspirational and could not liberate anyone who had already been enslaved. The Court order authorized the enslaver to forcefully transport his “property” back to the South, though legend has it that the three men escaped while crossing the Isthmus of Panama on the return trip. [In re Perkins 2 Cal 424 (1852); for background on the case and the alleged escape in Panama see Ray R. Albin, “The Perkins Case: The Ordeal of Three Slaves in Gold Rush California,” California History 67 (1988), 214-224; see also Stacey L. Smith, “Remaking Slavery in a Free State: Masters and Slaves in Gold Rush California,” Pacific Historical Review 80 (2011), 54-57.]

In the infamous case of Archy Lee, the California Supreme Court conceded that Lee had been brought to California from Mississippi by his enslaver, Charles Stovall, in 1857. This was well after the state constitution had abolished slavery and two years after the state fugitive slave law had expired. Thus, neither federal nor state law applied to his case. Although federal law allowed enslavers to bring enslaved persons into a free state while “in transit” or for a brief but undefined “sojourn,” the California Supreme Court admitted that these exceptions did not apply in this case because Stovall had stayed in California for at least six months and had hired out Lee during that time. Clearly, Stovall was not a mere sojourner or “in transit.” Inexplicitly, after admitting that Stovall “could not sustain either the character of a traveler or visitor,” the Court nevertheless went on to hold “that are circumstances connected with this particular case that may exempt him from the rules we have laid down.” Presumably, the “circumstances” in this case involved Stovall’s poor health, his youth, and his lack of knowledge of California law or the effect of its constitutional provision on his property rights. Because this was a case of first impression, the Court reasoned, if one can call it reasoning, that Stovall’s lack of knowledge on this point was understandable. The Court ordered that Lee be turned over to Stovall’s custody. (In re Archy (1858) 9 Cal 147, 171.)

Fortunately, the confused and inconsistent holding was not the end of the Archy Lee story. A group of white and Black abolitionists managed to facilitate another escape and, in San Francisco, Lee appealed to one of the federal court Commissioners established under the federal Fugitive Slave Act. The Commissioner over-ruled the questionable California Supreme Court ruling and declared that Lee was free. Lee reportedly (and understandably) left California and joined other prospectors heading for the Fraser River Gold Rush in British Columbia. (See Smith, supra, 59-63; Rudolph Lapp, Archy Lee: A California Fugitive Slave Case (Berkeley: 1969).)

In addition to the dangers of forced re-enslavement, African Americans in early California also endured several legal constraints, including, among other things, denial of the right to vote and prohibitions on testifying against whites in both criminal and civil trials. The denial of the right to testify was especially dangerous, as it affected the state fugitive slave law. For example, because state law permitted owners to reclaim and remove enslaved labor that had been brought into the state before 1850, an owner who came to California after 1850 could easily claim that they had come before. His enslaved labor could not offer testimony to the contrary. Inability to testify also meant that whites could commit crimes and breach contracts with African Americans with impunity, unless there were a white witness willing to testify against the white wrongdoer. On February 20, 1862, a group of Free Blacks petitioned the state legislature, praying that the members remove the prohibition on testimony. (In 1863, the Legislature repealed the prohibition as applied to African Americans, but allowed it to stand against Native Americans and persons of Chinese descent.)

An old adage rings true: the more things change, the more they remain the same. Like the petitioners in 1862, African Americans have continued to protest, file lawsuits, and change laws into the 20^th and 21^st centuries. Yet the successes brought about by the collective efforts of African Americans have too often met with reaction and setbacks. For example, in 1963 – one-hundred years after the Legislature repealed the ban on Black testimony – the Legislature enacted the Rumford Fair Housing Act, which prohibited racially-based discrimination in the sale or rental of residential housing. The legislation was named for its author, William Byron Rumford, one of the first African Americans to serve in the California Assembly, and reflected years of protest on the part of the Black community to challenge pervasive and institutionalized housing discrimination in California. The following year, 1964, California voters approved Proposition 14, a constitutional amendment that nullified the Rumford Fair Housing Act by declaring that a property owner had the right to “decline to sell, lease, or rent any part or all of his real property” to any person or persons “as he, in his absolute discretion, chooses.” In short, the Proposition gave property owners a constitutional right to discriminate on the basis of race. Although the United States Supreme Court declared Proposition 14 unconstitutional in 1967 (thus restoring the Rumford Act), the overwhelming popular vote in support of the ballot measure suggested to many African Americans that even rare legislative victories were not safe. Indeed, the McCone Commission, which investigated the causes of the 1965 Watts Rebellion, counted the dashed expectations caused by Proposition 14 among the sources of frustration – though hardly the only one – that led to the uprising. [For a detailed discussion of Proposition 14 see Daniel Martinez HoSang, Racial Propositions: Ballot Initiatives and the Making of Postwar California (Berkeley: 2010), chapter 3.]

Findings and Recommendations of Reparations Task Force. The more than 1000-page Task Force report lays out both the past and continuing legacy of California laws and policy that were, according to the Task Force, designed to prevent African Americans in California from enjoying the full benefits of their citizenship. (The California Reparations Report, “Executive Summary,” p. 48.) The section headings and chapter titles of the Report suggest the breathtaking range of laws and policies that have harmed African Americans: enslavement, racial terror, political disfranchisement, housing segregation, separate and unequal education, employment discrimination, and an unjust legal system that has led to unconscionable rates of incarceration for Black Californians. After laying out these findings of harm, the Report then examines international approaches to reparations and healing, from Germany, Chile, and South Africa, among others. These remedies can take the form of restitution, economic compensation, or programs of “rehabilitation,” which could include an array of legal and social services or educational programs. The remaining parts of the Report suggest specific remedies for California, starting with a formal apology. Because “apologies alone are inadequate reparations for victims,” the final sections of the Report make concrete policy recommendations, designed to provide true reparations for the harms documented in the Report. As the Report stresses on more than one occasion, the harms inflicted “have not been incidental or accidental,” but are often the intentional result of “an all-encompassing web of discriminatory laws, regulations, and policies enacted by government.” Therefore, addressing these wrongs will require changes in existing laws and the disruption of institutionalized patterns of racism.

While a formal apology and legislative remedies can be expected in subsequent bills, this resolution takes the preliminary and necessary step of first acknowledging and taking accountability for the harms enumerated in the Report.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The Alliance for Reparations, Reconciliation, and Truth (ARRT) is a newly-formed collaboration between the Black Equity Collective, the California Black Power Network, Catalyst California, Equal Justice Society, Live Free California, and former members of the California Reparations Task Force, writes in support:

While SCR 113 alone is not enough to repair the harm caused by California’s role in U.S. chattel slavery and its vestiges, as detailed in the final report of the Task Force to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans, its passage would be a significant step towards “satisfaction” as defined under international human rights law. Harm cannot be repaired unless and until one acknowledges that it exists. The task force’s over 1,100-page report details the harm done by the State of California in maintaining and enforcing the institution of slavery and, even upon its dissolution, continuing to cause harm to Black communities throughout the State of California.

In short, SCR 113 is an important step to righting a centuries-long wrong. California not only has an opportunity to become the first State in the nation to finally formally recognize and acknowledge the harms and atrocities caused by its role in U.S. chattel slavery and its vestiges, but it would also affirm the State of California’s role in protecting the descendants of enslaved people as well as the civil, political, and socio-cultural rights of Black Californians, particularly during a time when the rights of minority and traditionally underrepresented groups are being targeted, attacked, and devalued.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Alliance for Reparations, Reconciliation, and Truth

Black Equity Collective

California Black Power Network

California Reparations Task Force Members Grill, Holder, and Tamaki

Catalyst California

Livefree California

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Tom Clark / JUD. / (916) 319-2334

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SCR 113

Author: Smallwood-Cuevas (D), et al.

Amended: 2/21/24

Vote: 21

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 8-0, 2/26/24

AYES: Umberg, Allen, Ashby, Caballero, Durazo, Laird, Stern, Wahab

NO VOTE RECORDED: Wilk, Min, Niello

SUBJECT: Human rights violations and crimes against humanity on African slaves and their descendants

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST:

This resolution (1) acknowledges the harms and atrocities committed by representatives of the State of California who promoted, facilitated, enforced, and permitted the institution of chattel slavery and the legacy of ongoing badges and incidents of slavery that form the systemic structures of discrimination; (2) accepts the State’s responsibility for all of these harms and atrocities; and (3) affirms the State’s role in protecting the descendants of enslaved people as well as their civil, political, and socio-cultural rights.

ANALYSIS:

This resolution:

1. Provides that this resolution may be cited as the “Acknowledgement of Gross Human Rights Violations and Crimes Against Humanity on African Slaves and their Descendants.”
2. Declares that:
   1. The State of California—its executive, judicial, and legislative branches—denied African Americans their fundamental liberties and denied their humanity throughout the state’s history, from before the Civil War to the present.
   2. Although California entered the Union in 1850 outlawing slavery, the California Supreme Court stated that the antislavery law in the California Constitution was only a “declaration of a principle” and did not enact laws to enforce this provision and emancipate slaves.
   3. The California Supreme Court enforced the federal fugitive slave law until the official end of enslavement in 1865.
   4. The State of California prevented African Americans from testifying in court against a white person until 1863.
   5. The Legislature opposed Congress’ Reconstruction civil rights laws and delayed ratifying the 14th and 15th Amendments to the federal constitution.
   6. The State of California disenfranchised African American citizens through racial barriers to voting, such as poll taxes and literacy tests.
   7. The Legislature prohibited interracial marriage and passed an anti-miscegenation law in its first legislative session in 1850. The Legislature repeatedly refused to repeal the law after the California Supreme Court struck it down in 1948, and only did so 11 years later.
   8. The State of California constructed monuments, memorials, state markers, and plaques memorializing and preserving confederate culture and glorifying slavery and white supremacy.
   9. From the brutality of enslavement to contemporary police killings, state and local government-sanctioned violence, such as lynching, coercive sterilization, torture, and property destruction inflicted death, physical injuries, and psychological harms on African Americans in California.
   10. The State of California openly allowed segregation and discrimination against African Americans with respect to musicians, workers, and artists.
   11. State and local governments in California enacted restrictive zoning ordinances, licensing laws, fire and safety codes, and anti-nuisance laws to disrupt African American businesses and their customers.
   12. Discriminatory housing policies including redlining, residential zoning ordinances, and loan practices have produced persistent and longstanding housing segregation and inequities in home ownership for African Americans in California.
   13. State and local governments in California targeted property owned by African Americans in urban renewal and development projects for unjust uses of eminent domain, often without providing just compensation.
   14. State and local segregation laws in California historically excluded African Americans from outdoor recreation, public transit, and other public infrastructure.
   15. The eugenics movement thrived in California and thousands of African Americans were forcibly sterilized or were the subjects of medical experiments without consent.
   16. Black Californians experience persistent discrimination in healthcare services and access through inaccurate diagnoses, use of involuntary force, high costs, and a lack of culturally competent services.
   17. African Americans have been routinely excluded from professional careers in California. For example, African American physicians, psychologists, and psychiatrists are underrepresented in California’s medical fields, further exacerbating the inequities in the healthcare system.
   18. California’s child welfare system has experienced some of the worst racial disparities in the country, with African American children suffering the highest rate of system involvement and correspondingly heightened risks and harms associated with entering foster care.
3. Resolves by the Senate, with the Assembly concurring, that:
   1. The State of California recognizes and accepts responsibility for all of the harms and atrocities committed by representatives of the state who promoted, facilitated, enforced, and permitted the institution of chattel slavery and its legacy of ongoing badges and incidents of slavery that form the systemic structures of discrimination.
   2. The State of California now affirms its role in protecting the descendants of enslaved people as well as their civil, political, and socio-cultural rights.
   3. The Secretary of the Senate shall transmit copies of this resolution to the author for appropriate distribution.

Comments

This resolution is identical to ACR 135 (Weber, 2024), which is pending before the Assembly floor.

This resolution does not constitute a formal state apology, though one is in the works. AB 3089 (Jones-Sawyer, 2024), which is pending referral in the Assembly, would issue a formal apology on behalf of the State in the form of a formal apology proclamation. This resolution is also not intended to create any liability on behalf of, or right to benefits from, the State of California or any of its subdivisions or employees; the acknowledgement of responsibility is intended to convey moral, but not legal, culpability. Nevertheless, as explained by the author, this non-binding acknowledgement of responsibility and apology is an important and long overdue first step towards recognizing the ongoing harms of slavery.

According to the author:

This resolution is a long overdue acknowledgement of the ongoing harms of slavery in our state and nation. One of the most powerful aspects of the Reparations Tasks Force Report was the detailed discussion of how laws in California were crafted to directly cause harm to its Black residents. That harm touched every aspect of their lives and many of those harms are still felt by Black Californians generations later. This is why the Caucus’ first step has been to introduce a resolution that recognizes that harm done against Black Californians.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local: No

SUPPORT: (Verified 2/23/24)

None received

OPPOSITION: (Verified 2/23/24)

None received

Prepared by: Allison Whitt Meredith / JUD. / (916) 651-4113

2/28/24 9:46:10

**** END ****

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

Senator Thomas Umberg, Chair

2023-2024 Regular Session

Bill No: SCR 113 (Author:Smallwood-Cuevas)

Version: February 21, 2024

Hearing Date: February 26, 2024

Fiscal: No

Urgency: No

Consultant: AWM

SUBJECT

Human rights violations and crimes against humanity on African slaves and their descendants

DIGEST

This resolution acknowledges the harms and atrocities committed by representatives of the State of California who promoted, facilitated, enforced, and permitted the institution of chattel slavery and the legacy of ongoing badges and incidents of slavery that form the systemic structures of discrimination; accepts the State’s responsibility for all of these harms and atrocities; and affirms the State’s role in protecting the descendants of enslaved people as well as their civil, political, and socio-cultural rights.

This resolution is sponsored by the author. The Committee has not received timely support or opposition to this resolution.

SUMMARY

This resolution:

1. May be cited as the “Acknowledgement of Gross Human Rights Violations and Crimes Against Humanity on African Slaves and their Descendants.”
2. Declares that:
   1. The State of California—its executive, judicial, and legislative branches—denied African Americans their fundamental liberties and denied their humanity throughout the state’s history, from before the Civil War to the present.
   2. Although California entered the Union in 1850 outlawing slavery, the California Supreme Court stated that the antislavery law in the California Constitution was only a “declaration of a principle” and did not enact laws to enforce this provision and emancipate slaves.
   3. The California Supreme Court enforced the federal fugitive slave law until the official end of enslavement in 1865.
   4. The State of California prevented African Americans from testifying in court against a white person until 1863.
   5. The California Legislature opposed Congress’ Reconstruction civil rights laws and delayed ratifying the 14th and 15th Amendments to the federal constitution.
   6. The State of California disenfranchised African American citizens through racial barriers to voting, such as poll taxes and literacy tests.
   7. The California Legislature prohibited interracial marriage and passed an anti-miscegenation law in its first legislative session in 1850. The Legislature repeatedly refused to repeal the law after the California Supreme Court struck it down in 1948, and only did so 11 years later.
   8. The State of California constructed monuments, memorials, state markers, and plaques memorializing and preserving confederate culture and glorifying slavery and white supremacy.
   9. From the brutality of enslavement to contemporary police killings, state and local government-sanctioned violence, such as lynching, coercive sterilization, torture, and property destruction inflicted death, physical injuries, and psychological harms on African Americans in California.
   10. The State of California openly allowed segregation and discrimination against African Americans with respect to musicians, workers, and artists.
   11. State and local governments in California enacted restrictive zoning ordinances, licensing laws, fire and safety codes, and anti-nuisance laws to disrupt African American businesses and their customers.
   12. Discriminatory housing policies including redlining, residential zoning ordinances, and loan practices have produced persistent and longstanding housing segregation and inequities in home ownership for African Americans in California.
   13. State and local governments in California targeted property owned by African Americans in urban renewal and development projects for unjust uses of eminent domain, often without providing just compensation.
   14. State and local segregation laws in California historically excluded African Americans from outdoor recreation, public transit, and other public infrastructure.
   15. The eugenics movement thrived in California and thousands of African Americans were forcibly sterilized or were the subjects of medical experiments without consent.
   16. Black Californians experience persistent discrimination in healthcare services and access through inaccurate diagnoses, use of involuntary force, high costs, and a lack of culturally competent services.
   17. African Americans have been routinely excluded from professional careers in California. For example, African American physicians, psychologists, and psychiatrists are underrepresented in California’s medical fields, further exacerbating the inequities in the healthcare system.
   18. California’s child welfare system has experienced some of the worst racial disparities in the country, with African American children suffering the highest rate of system involvement and correspondingly heightened risks and harms associated with entering foster care.
3. Resolves by the Senate, with the Assembly concurring, that:
   1. The State of California recognizes and accepts responsibility for all of the harms and atrocities committed by representatives of the state who promoted, facilitated, enforced, and permitted the institution of chattel slavery and its legacy of ongoing badges and incidents of slavery that form the systemic structures of discrimination.
   2. The State of California now affirms its role in protecting the descendants of enslaved people as well as their civil, political, and socio-cultural rights.
   3. The Secretary of the Senate shall transmit copies of this resolution to the author for appropriate distribution.

COMMENTS

1. Author’s statement

According to the author:

This resolution is a long overdue acknowledgement of the ongoing harms of slavery in our state and nation. One of the most powerful aspects of the Reparations Tasks Force Report was the detailed discussion of how laws in California were crafted to directly cause harm to its Black residents. That harm touched every aspect of their lives and many of those harms are still felt by Black Californians generations later. This is why the Caucus’ first step has been to introduce a resolution that recognizes that harm done against Black Californians.

2. California’s long, shameful history of supporting slavery and implementing discriminatory policies targeted at African Americans

There is not room in this analysis for a full account of California’s willful, intentional discrimination against African Americans or the effects of centuries of discrimination and unequal treatment. The Task Force to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans (Task Force) issued a final report on the matter that is over 1,000 pages long (discussed further in Part 3); this analysis is not intended to be nearly as comprehensive. Instead, this analysis discusses some of the most egregious instances of discrimination and resulting inequalities listed in the resolution before the Committee.

Because California was officially admitted to the United States as a “free state,”^[1] its role in perpetuating slavery is often overlooked. At a national level, California was admitted to the Union as part of a compromise that also included the passage of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, which compelled officials to aid in the return of escaped enslaved persons and denied escaped enslaved persons (or alleged escaped enslaved persons) the right to a jury trial.^[2] Here, despite California’s “free state” status, slavery was common within the state.^[3] Indeed, California was so willing to perpetuate the institution of slavery that in 1852, California enacted its own fugitive slave statute that (1) made it easier for enslaved persons who fled to California to be recaptured and returned to the state in which they were held in bondage, and (2) required all enslaved persons who were brought or introduced to the State before its admission to the United States to return to their original state, or else be deemed fugitives.^[4] The California Supreme Court upheld the 1852 Fugitive Slave Act, affirming that enslavers who brought enslaved persons from other states were not affected by the anti-slavery clause in the constitution.^[5]

Similarly, while California fought on the side of the Union in the Civil War, the State remained hostile to racial equality. While the nation as a whole ratified the “Reconstruction Amendments”—the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution—California dragged its feet. The State did not ratify the Thirteenth Amendment (prohibiting slavery) until after the amendment had already become the law of the land,^[6] and it did not ratify the Fourteenth Amendment (promising equal protection under the law) and the Fifteenth Amendment (protecting the right to vote) until 1959 and 1962.^[7]

California’s refusal to endorse measures to promote equality at the national level was matched by measures dedicated to preserving white supremacy within the state. California adopted several measures intended to prevent persons of color, including African Americans, from voting, including adding a literacy requirement in 1894 that lasted until 1970.^[8] The State’s ban on interracial marriage lasted until 1948, when it was struck down by the California Supreme Court;^[9] the Legislature refused to repeal the law for another 11 years.^[10] California also permitted employers and labor unions to openly discriminate on the basis of race.^[11]

The State’s anti-African American animus is particularly clear in the realm of property rights and home ownership. Federal, state, and local governments established systems of “redlining, zoning ordinances, school and highway sitting decisions, and discriminatory federal mortgage policy,” which prevented African Americans from developing intergenerational wealth, devalued property owned by African Americans, and deliberately placed health hazards (such as freeways and chemical plants) in neighborhoods with high African American populations.^[12] California also permitted white homeowners to enter into agreements not to sell homes to African American buyers (and, often, other people of color), known as “racially restrictive covenants”; the California Supreme Court approved of the practice in 1919,^[13] and that ruling stayed in effect until the United States Supreme Court prohibited the enforcement of racially restrictive covenants in 1948.^[14] In 1964, Californians overwhelmingly approved a ballot measure to prohibit the state Fair Employment Practices Commission to intervene on behalf of potential tenants and homebuyers in housing discrimination cases.^[15]

The 1950s and 1960s are often recognized as the end of explicit (de jure) race-based discriminatory laws, but in many cases, state efforts to maintain white supremacy merely shifted to legislation targeted at African Americans without mentioning them by name (de facto discrimination). One significant example of this phenomenon is the use of the criminal justice system to target African Americans, which resulted in the U.S. prison population quadrupling between 1980 and 2000.^[16] The increase in imprisonment was not due to an increase in crime, but an increase in long prison sentences and other “tough-on-crime” measures targeted at African Americans, such as the 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act’s provision of a five-year minimum sentence for possession of five grams of crack cocaine (commonly associated with African American drug users) and five hundred grams of powder cocaine (commonly associated with white drug users).^[17] African Americans were also disproportionately targeted and charged with crimes:

‘Between 1983 and 1997, the number of African Americans admitted to prison for drug offenses increased more than twenty-six-fold, relative to a sevenfold increase for whites … By 2001, there were more than twice as many African Americans as whites in state prison for drug offenses.’^[18]

There is no evidence suggesting that African Americans sell or use drugs at a greater rate than whites, much less at a rate that would explain the vast disparity in prison populations.^[19]

As a result of centuries of deliberate, systematic discrimination and exclusion, African Americans in California are significantly worse off than their white counterparts across multiple metrics. Economically, policies that bolstered the development of white wealth and prevented the development of African American wealth were effective: as of 2019, white households owned nine times more assets than Black households.^[20] Disproportionate incarceration rates had ripple effects far beyond the term of imprisonment, including increasing the risk of homelessness.^[21] African American families have also been disproportionately harmed: as of July 2023, African American children made up over 20 percent of children in foster care in the state,^[22] even though African American children are approximately 5.4 percent of the state’s child population.^[23] And “African Americans have higher rates of morbidity and mortality than white Americans for almost all health outcomes in the United States,” which is the result of “a culmination of historical racial inequalities, discriminatory health policy, and persistent racial discrimination in many sectors of life in the United States.”^[24]

3. The Task Force’s reports and recommendations

In 2020, the Legislature enacted AB 3121 (Weber, Ch. 319, Stats. 2020), which created the first-in-the-nation Task Force to explore options for providing reparations to African Americans, and particularly the descendants of enslaved persons, in recognition of California’s role in the heinous institution of slavery and the post-abolition perpetuation of racist institutions.^[25] The Task Force released an interim report on June 1, 2022, which provided the Task Force’s preliminary findings regarding the ongoing and compounding harms caused by federal, state, and local governments from slavery and the “ ‘badges and incidents of slavery’ ” that continued to be imposed on African Americans long after slavery was formally abolished.^[26] The report notes that, because “the effects of slavery infected every aspect of American society over the last 400 years…it is nearly impossible to identify every ‘badge and incident of slavery,’ to include every piece of evidence, or describe every harm done to African Americans.”^[27]

On June 29, 2023, the Task Force issued its final report to the California Legislature.^[28] The final report incorporates and updates the interim report and recommends appropriate remedies, including compensation, for African Americans as recompense for the State’s gross human rights violations against African Americans and their descendants.^[29] The final report explains:

[T]he harms inflicted upon African Americans have not been incidental or accidental—they have been by design. They are the result of an all-encompassing web of discriminatory laws, regulations, and policies enacted by government. These laws and policies have enabled government officials and private individuals and entities to perpetuate the legacy of slavery by subjecting African Americans as a group to discrimination, exclusion, neglect, and violence in every facet of American life. And there has been no comprehensive effort to disrupt and dismantle institutionalized racism, stop the harm, and redress the specific injuries caused to descendants and the larger African American community.^[30]

The Task Force developed its recommendations for reparations taking into account this willful infliction of harm and applying international standards and principles for the remedy of wrongs and injuries caused by a government.^[31] One of the Task Force’s recommendations is that the State formally apologize for its human rights abuses.^[32]

4. This resolution acknowledges, apologizes for, and accepts responsibility for California’s role in promoting, facilitating, enforcing, and permitting the institution of chattel slavery and the subsequent systematic structures of discrimination against African Americans

This resolution takes the first step toward implementing the recommendations of the Task Force, by acknowledging the harms and abuses perpetrated by the State against African Americans, accepting responsibility for the harms and atrocities it caused, and apologizing for them. The resolution further affirms California’s role, going forward, in protecting the descendants of enslaved people. This resolution is identical to ACR 135 (Weber, 2024), which is pending before the Assembly floor.

The resolution does not constitute a formal state apology, though one is in the works. AB 3089 (Jones-Sawyer, 2024), which is pending referral in the Assembly, would issue a formal apology on behalf of the State in the form of a formal apology proclamation. This resolution is also not intended to create any liability on behalf of, or right to benefits from, the State of California or any of its subdivisions or employees; the acknowledgement of responsibility is intended to convey moral, but not legal, culpability. Nevertheless, as explained by the author, this non-binding acknowledgement of responsibility and apology is an important and long overdue first step towards recognizing the ongoing harms of slavery.

SUPPORT

None received

OPPOSITION

None received

RELATED LEGISLATION

Pending Legislation:

AB 3089 (Jones-Sawyer, 2024) provides that the State of California recognizes and accepts responsibility for all of the harms and atrocities committed by the state, its representatives thereof, and entities under its jurisdiction who promoted, facilitated, enforced, and permitted the institution of chattel slavery and the enduring legacy of ongoing badges and incidents from which the systemic structures of discrimination have come to exist; provides that the State of California accepts this responsibility with a formal apology for the harms perpetrated by the state, and orders this apology to be memorialized in the form of a proclamation to be publicly and conspicuously displayed permanently in the California State Capitol building; and requires the Legislature to prepare a formal apology proclamation, as specified. AB 3089 is pending referral in the Assembly.

ACR 135 (Weber, 2024) is substantially similar to this resolution. ACR 135 is pending on the Assembly Floor.

Prior Legislation:

AB 3121 (Weber, Ch. 319, Stats. 2020) established a nine-member “Task Force to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans, with a Special Consideration for African Americans Who are Descendants of Persons Enslaved in the United States.” The legislation required the Task Force to, among other things, identify, compile, and synthesize the relevant evidence and documentation on the institution of slavery that existed within the United States and the colonies; recommend the forms that any compensation might take and who should be eligible for such compensation. Finally, the bill required the Task Force to submit a written report of its findings and recommendations to the Legislature. The final report was released on June 29, 2023, and the legislation establishing the Task Force became inoperative on July 1, 2023.

AJR 21 (Gonzalez, 2019) would have formally apologized for California’s past complicity in enabling and furthering the practice of slavery and urged the United States Congress and the President of the United States to enact House Resolution 40 to study the legacy of slavery and provide recommendations on redress for descendants of enslaved persons. AJR 12 died in the Senate Rules Committee.

**************

1. See Pub. L. No. 31-50 (Sept. 9, 1850), 9 Stat. 452. ↑

2. See Pub. L. No. 31-60 (Sept. 18, 1850), 9 Stat. 462. Several states’ legislatures passed acts purporting to nullify the federal Fugitive Slave Act; California was not among them. ↑

3. Smith, Remaking Slavery in a Free State: Masters and Slaves in Gold Rush California, 80 Pacific Historical Review 28, 29-30 (2011). The exact number of African American enslaved persons in California in the 1850s is unknown, but estimates range from several hundred to a few thousand. (Id., p. 29, fn. 2.; see also Beckner, Slavery: California’s hidden sin, Sacramento News & Review (Oct. 23, 2003) (California newspapers in the 1850s advertising slave sales), available at https://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/slavery-californias-hidden-sin/content?oid=16199.) All links in this analysis are current as of February 23, 2024. ↑

4. See An Act Respecting Fugitives from Labor, and Slaves brought to this State prior to her Admission into the Union, April 15, 1852, ch. 33, California Statutes, at 67-69. ↑

5. In re Perkins (1852) 2 Cal. 424, 437-441, 454-457. ↑

6. Katz, et al., Reckoning With Our Rights: The Evolution of Voter Access in California (2020), p. 6, available at https://tinyurl.com/5xzhj32p. ↑

7. California Task Force to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans, Final Report (Jun. 29, 2023), p. 4, available at https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/full-ca-reparations.pdf (Final Report). ↑

8. Castro v. State of California (1970) 2 Cal.3d 223, 231, 243. The literacy requirement was struck down by the California Supreme Court. (Id. at p. 243.) ↑

9. Perez v. Sharp (1948) 32 Cal.2d 711, 731-732. ↑

10. Final Report, supra, p. 309. ↑

11. Id. at p. 375. ↑

12. Id. at pp. 9-10. ↑

13. Los Angeles Inv. Co. v. Gary (1919) 181 Cal.60, 684. ↑

14. Shelley v. Kraemer (1948) 334 U.S. 1, 20. Racially restrictive covenants were not actually outlawed until the passage of the federal Fair Housing Act in 1948. (See 42 U.S.C. § 3604.) ↑

15. Reft, How Prop 14 Shaped California’s Racial Covenants, KCET.org (Sept. 20, 2017), https://www.kcet.org/shows/city-rising/how-prop-14-shaped-californias-racial-covenants. The ballot measure passed with 65 percent of the vote. (Ibid.) The ballot measure was eventually struck down. (See Reitman v. Mulkey (1967) 387 U.S. 369, 373-374 (affirming California Supreme Court opinion striking Proposition 14 as unconstitutional.)) ↑

16. Coates, The Black Family in the Age of Mass Incarceration, The Atlantic (Oct. 2015), available at https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/10/the-black-family-in-the-age-of-mass-incarceration/403246/. ↑

17. Ibid. ↑

18. Ibid. ↑

19. Final Report, supra, p. 411. ↑

20. Final Report, supra, p. 15. ↑

21. Id. at pp. 417-418. ↑

22. California Child Welfare Indicators Project, University of California at Berkeley, Report: Children in Foster Care by Ethnic Group: Number in Care, CWS/CMS 2023 Quarter 3 Extract (Feb. 21, 2024), available at https://ccwip.berkeley.edu/childwelfare/reports/InCareRates/MTSG/r/rts/l. ↑

23. Id., Report: Children in Foster Care by Ethnic Group: Total Child Population. ↑

24. Final Report, supra, p. 462. ↑

25. HR 40 (Lee, 118th Cong., 2023-2024), a federal bill to create a federal commission to study the effects of slavery and discrimination on African Americans and devise reparations proposals, is pending before the House Committee on Judiciary. The bill has been introduced every year since 1989. ↑

26. California Task Force to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans, Interim Report (June 1, 2022), available at https://oag.ca.gov/ab3121/reports. ↑

27. Id. at p. 5. ↑

28. See generally Final Report, supra. ↑

29. Id. at p. 4. ↑

30. Id. at p. 48. ↑

31. Id. at p. 512. ↑

32. Id. at pp. 596-597. ↑