California’s ambitious push towards reparations for slavery and racial discrimination has encountered significant hurdles, as Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed a key legislative proposal on land restitution. The decision, a setback for proponents of the movement, has raised broader questions about the feasibility of state-led efforts to redress historic injustices, particularly in the absence of federal leadership.
The veto, delivered by Newsom last month, rejected the most far-reaching component of a broader reparations package put forward by California lawmakers. The land restitution bill, authored by state Senator Steven Bradford, was designed to facilitate the return of public lands to descendants of enslaved individuals. Newsom argued that it could not be implemented without the accompanying legislative infrastructure proposed by Bradford—specifically, the creation of a dedicated reparations fund and an oversight agency to determine eligibility.
The broader package of reforms, developed in part by the California Reparations Task Force, was hailed as a pioneering effort to address the enduring legacy of slavery within the state. Nevertheless, the proposals faltered after internal disagreements among members of the state’s Black Caucus, who blocked votes on the two bills essential to the land restitution scheme. In a public statement, Black Caucus members cited concerns over relinquishing legislative control to an unelected agency that would have overseen reparations claims.
Bradford, who recently completed his final term in office, lamented the loss of momentum in the reparations movement. “To be this close to the finish line, and not at least have a vote, it’s a shame,” he said. His sentiments echoed the frustration of many advocates, including Kamilah Moore, a prominent lawyer and former chair of the California Reparations Task Force, who remarked that the setbacks had renewed, rather than diminished, determination among activists.
“Reparations is ultimately a federal responsibility that states and municipalities have taken into their own hands,” Moore noted. “What we’re seeing in California, hopefully, is the beginning of a domino effect that leads to a national reckoning.”
Despite the impasse in California, the reparations movement continues to gain traction across the United States, albeit amid legal challenges and growing political resistance. In Evanston, Illinois, where a landmark reparations programme was introduced in 2021, the city’s efforts are currently under legal scrutiny. The conservative legal group Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit, branding the reparations initiative as “discriminatory,” yet local officials, including City Council member Bobby Burns, remain undeterred. “The lawsuit hasn’t stopped us from continuing to make good on the commitments we’ve made,” Burns said, signalling the resilience of Evanston’s reparations campaign.
Similarly, the academic sphere has not been immune to controversy surrounding reparations. Harvard University, which has faced increasing pressure to acknowledge its historical ties to slavery, has experienced internal turmoil over its own efforts at restitution. Following the resignation of a key executive from the university’s initiative to address its slavery legacy, concerns were raised by staff about the institution’s commitment to meaningful action. Harvard has since pledged to engage directly with descendants of enslaved individuals as part of its reparative programme.
The broader debate over reparations remains highly polarised within the United States. A 2023 Reuters/Ipsos survey revealed stark racial divides on the issue: while 74% of Black Americans expressed support for reparations, only 26% of white Americans endorsed such measures. Key points of contention include the extent to which reparations should be used to address persistent racial disparities in education, employment, and health, as well as the financial burden on current taxpayers for the injustices of the past.
The unresolved national debate on reparations has roots stretching back to the immediate aftermath of the Civil War, when initial efforts to provide compensation to newly freed African Americans were abruptly abandoned. As Southern white elites regained political power, segregation laws and racial violence suppressed the rights of Black Americans, pushing the question of reparations to the margins of federal policymaking for decades.
At the federal level, a proposal to create a commission to study reparations has languished in Congress for over 35 years. While there have been sporadic calls to revisit the issue, most notably following the 2020 killing of George Floyd by a white police officer in Minneapolis, there has been little meaningful progress towards a federal reparations framework.
Nevertheless, California’s leadership on the issue has provided a glimmer of hope for activists. The state’s 2021 reparations report—released by the California Reparations Task Force—laid bare the institutional mechanisms that perpetuated racial inequalities, offering over 100 policy recommendations to address the harms caused by slavery. Although only a handful of these proposals have been translated into legislation, the task force’s work has been hailed as a vital blueprint for other states and municipalities exploring their own reparations initiatives.
Despite Governor Newsom’s veto, there are indications that the fight for reparations in California is far from over. Assemblywoman Lori Wilson, a staunch supporter of the movement, has confirmed that reparations proposals will be reintroduced in the next legislative session. Advocates remain hopeful that California’s pioneering efforts will catalyse broader discussions at the national level, potentially accelerating the long-stalled federal dialogue on reparations.
