DOJ Moves to Block Evanston's $25,000 Reparations Grants as Race-Based Lawsuit Advances
Updated
Updated · Fox News · Jun 20
DOJ Moves to Block Evanston's $25,000 Reparations Grants as Race-Based Lawsuit Advances
3 articles · Updated · Fox News · Jun 20
Summary
The Justice Department asked a federal court to join a class-action suit against Evanston's reparations housing program, seeking to help shut down the initiative.
DOJ argues the program violates the Fourteenth Amendment and Fair Housing Act because it gives $25,000 housing benefits based on race and ancestry rather than individualized proof of harm.
Evanston's program, approved in 2019 and launched in 2021, is open to Black residents who lived in the city between 1919 and 1969 or their direct descendants; more than $7 million of a $20 million fund has been distributed.
The case began in May 2024 when Judicial Watch sued on behalf of six non-Black descendants, and a judge in March let the challenge proceed while DOJ also opened a civil-rights investigation.
Evanston said it still stands by the program's legality, while DOJ signaled it may scrutinize other local reparations efforts, including in Asheville, North Carolina.
Can a city legally use race as a factor to remedy past housing discrimination?
Could the DOJ's lawsuit against Evanston dismantle all local reparations programs?
If Evanston's program is struck down, must residents return the money they received?
DOJ Challenges Evanston’s $25,000 Black Reparations Program: National Legal Test for Race-Based Remedies
Overview
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has intervened in the civil rights lawsuit Flinn V. City of Evanston, challenging the city’s pioneering reparations program for Black residents. The DOJ argues that using race as a criterion for payments is unconstitutional, claiming the program violates the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and the Fair Housing Act. Federal officials describe the initiative as illegal race discrimination and cite Supreme Court rulings that government actions based on race are presumptively unconstitutional. This intervention marks a major federal challenge, bringing national attention and significant legal weight to the future of reparations efforts in the United States.