Do you think Texas Versus white is a good case to use against the reperations arguement?

Question

Do you think Texas v White, the supreme court case that said those acting in rebellion are not due the protections of the constitution, therefore allow a legal blockade to reparations?

My reasoning is this. My ancestors were property, even in the Union under Federal Law. Ergo, the claims of slaves has no legal merit due to the fact that you cannot be sued by your own property. Therefore, there is no legal leg to the reparations arguement.

The emancipation proclamation was an executive order, and is in itself an uncontitutional violation of due process. it was the 13th that set my people free, not an executive order.
Since slaves were property of rebels, and rebels do not have constitutional rights, the property of rebels are not afforded constitutional protections. Ergo slaves have no redress of grievnece under the laws as it now stands. To allow reperations would require a legislative act allowing constitutional protections for rebels and enemies of the usa.

Some of you read my words, and others did not. I do not support reperations for slavery, and my arguement is an attempt to show the unlawfullness of the attempt.

The emancipation proclamation is a suspension of property rights. Not all persons living in the south were in support of the rebellion, and as such they deserved due process to prevent the confiscation of thier property. Don't get me wrong. I am happy that my ancestors were freed, and am grateful for the white, black, and brown blood spilt to achieve that freedom. However, I worry about the legal precedent such an usurpation of executive power sets for our republic.

Answer 1

very astute reasoning on your part with the exception of your assertion that the Emancipation Proclamation was unconstitutional. it was not. it only freed those slaves held in those provinces "in open rebellion", as such, he had the authority to declare them free

Answer 2

Regardless of Texas v White, The current Fed gov. went through great expense and sacrificed many lives to end The War Between the States, resulting in the end of legal slavery in this country. Any reperations are arguably due to the families of those of those who lost their lives fighting for the current gov. from the families of those who received 40 acres and a mule off the estates of their previous enslavers (I think that was the offer of reperations at the time). Many lost it as a result of Northern Carpet Baggers, but that was not the doing of the previously existing system.
How does a current citizen prove that their ancestor didn't already receive benefits? That their ancestor was here then instead of coming later as an imigrant after the WAR? Can't we just move on? Who owes who what is a chew toy for freeriders. If you haven't been able to make something of yourself by now, with the sacrifice of so many well meaning folks, you won't do anything with a settlement but lose it in the lottery or worse. Perhaps an itemized bill to the beneficiaries of emancipation would be in order. Let it be, folks , just let it be.

Answer 3

First, there is not a single former slave alive today. If there were they would certainly be due just compensation for their labor, but the ancestors of atrocities do not deserve compensation in any way. As a precedent for this point of view, from the last century, let us look at how the compensation of slave labor during the holocaust of World War II has been handled. The thousands of people that survived that inequity are being compensated by both the government of Germany and by the companies that gained from their forced labor, and rightfully so. But their children have no inherited right to collect for the uncompensated labor of their parents. Certainly the grandchildren and great grandchildren of American slaves never experienced the appalling life of slavery, and therefore, like the children of Jews and others enslaved in Germany 50 years ago, they have no claim for themselves.

Secondly, blacks do not have a monopoly on living in poverty in this country. According to the latest census data approximately 30 percent of blacks and whites live in poverty. Hispanics unfortunately have an even higher percentage living below the poverty line. All this current day poverty can not be attributed to a disgusting institution that was ended 150 years ago. It can however be attributed to present day governmental policy. There should be a monumental effort made by the government, at all levels, to get all Americans out of poverty, but a policy centered on only one race is just as wrong as slavery was.

Thirdly, slavery could not have existed without the complicity of black Africans who supplied most of the unfortunate humans that were sold into this dreadful condition. It was not just whites that kept this retched institution going for over 200 years. In addition, there were over 200,000 white Americans that paid the ultimate retribution during the Civil War, when they gave their lives to end slavery. The reparation debt owed to slaves was paid a long time ago when the North won the Civil War and freed them.

Answer 4

Well it sounds like it would work. But you see since my ancestors were serfs (sold along with the land quite a few times) over in Europe I was hoping if it the reparations worked here I could sue England and France and get some megabucks opps mega-euros

Answer 5

Yes, I see your point, nontheless reparations would, and should not happen. It didn't start here in America but in Africa with the tribes selling their own. To this day there is still legal slave trading in Africa.

Answer 6

I feel this is not a legal question but one of morality. I think everyone is entiled to the constitutions protection since the question of humanity and property have been settled.

Answer 7

reperations argument in a new case? ask your attorney.