Should descendants of African American slaves receive reparations as a form of redress for slavery and the systemic inequalities that still linger in its wake? Will the payment of reparations help or harm current race relations in the United States? In light of affirmative action, welfare, and other social programs, have reparations, in fact, already been paid?

And what about the legal basis for such a pursuit—does a valid case with strong evidence and legal precedents for reparations exist?

These questions and others were addressed at “Reparations in the 21st Century,” a panel discussion held October 15, 2001, in the UDC Auditorium. Officially a fundraiser for the David A. Clarke Scholarship Campaign, the program did more than just raise approximately $42K for law student scholarships. It also succeeded in raising consciousness and creating awareness about an issue fraught with controversy and often misunderstood. Even though the United States walked out of the Durban, South Africa, World Conference Against Racism over the issue of reparations just weeks earlier, UDC President Timothy Jenkins made it clear in his opening remarks that a discussion of reparations is supported and encouraged at UDC.

“For us here at the David A. Clarke School of Law at the University of the District of Columbia, this is the kind of subject matter that we should discuss and expose to the people,” said Jenkins.

After Jenkins’s remarks, Dean Shelley Broderick welcomed the diverse audience—including D.C. Court of Appeals Judge Julia Cooper Mack, D.C. Superior Court Chief Judge Rufus King, Hilda and Charles Mason, DCSL Foundation President Mike Rauh, present and past D.C. councilmembers, ANC commissioners, UDC Trustees, and many others—who were in attendance. Following two musical selections performed by vocalist Norma Ormond and pianist Hildred Roach, an evening of cutting-edge civic, intellectual, and educational discussion began.

Beyond 40 Acres and a Mule

All the panelists for the event supported reparations for the descendants of African American slaves. However, each panelist brought with him a different set of experiences and contributed a unique perspective from which to view and understand the issue. The first panelist, Alexander J. Pires, Jr., of the Washington, D.C. law firm Conlon, Frantz, Phelan, and Pires, won a $1 billon settlement for over 22,000 African American farmers in a discrimination class action lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Pires is also part of the “dream team” of lawyers who plan to file what will likely be many reparations lawsuits targeting the U.S. Government and businesses who sanctioned and directly benefited from slavery. Throughout the evening, Pires emphasized how white supremacy has always been part and parcel of the U.S. legal system, which was inherited from the British. Nonetheless, despite the obstacles he and his colleagues will undoubtedly face in pursuing the lawsuits, Pires championed the cause of reparations.

“I can’t think of a lawsuit in this country that is more important. There is nothing in comparison,” said Pires.

The second panelist, Martin Mendelsohn of the Washington, D.C. law firm Verner, Liipfert, Bernhard, McPherson, and Hand, spoke about his efforts to obtain reparations—approximately $7 billion—for victims of the Nazi Holocaust. Mendelsohn noted that the plaintiff class for the case he litigated was very broad and “universal,” encompassing slave laborers, the poor, Jehovah’s Witnesses, “gypsies,” homosexuals, and the disabled. That broad base was crucial to the success of the lawsuit he filed. Although there may be a strong moral and legal basis for reparations in the U.S., according to Mendelsohn the political basis is “tenuous.” If a reparations lawsuit is to succeed, Mendelsohn suggested that proponents form a similar political coalition to that formed in the Nazi Holocaust case.

Pires and Mendelsohn, with the assistance of the evening’s moderator, Wade Henderson, helped situate the topic of reparations within a broad historical, legal, and international context. Henderson, who serves as the Executive Director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights and the UDC-DCSL Joseph L. Rauh, Jr. Professor of Public Interest Law, guided the two panelists to explain how the lessons learned from their cases were directly applicable to the case for reparations for descendants of African American slaves. That laid the groundwork for the incisive commentary provided by the third panelist, Charles J. Ogletree, Jr., who argued that—to borrow the subtitle of Randall Robinson’s manifesto on African American reparations, The Debt—“what America owes to blacks” goes much beyond the 40 acres and a mule still outstanding after the Civil War.

An American Solution

During the discussion, Henderson asked Ogletree whether or not he believes the U.S. should apologize to African Americans for slavery.

“If we are paid-in-full for the hundreds of years of slavery, the nearly one hundred years of Jim Crow laws, the continuing legacy of racial discrimination and oppression—I don’t care much about the apology,” responded Ogletree, summarizing the position he would emphasize and elaborate upon throughout the evening.

The Chairman of the UDC Board of Trustees and a professor at Harvard Law School, Ogletree is spearheading the reparations lawsuit through a personal and professional minefield of criticism and even death threats. But Ogletree is unfazed, focusing his energy on fine tuning the legal cases, which will argue claims such as unjust enrichment and failure to provide equal protection and due process under the law. Combined, the restitution sought in all the cases will result in what Ogletree believes is “an American solution.”

“Eliminating things like poverty, under-education, healthcare disparity, housing discrimination … that’s not solving black problems, that’s solving American problems. I hope that blacks and whites will wake up and see that this is not about a group getting their free payday. This is about changing America fundamentally in a way that would make this a nation that truly is equal justice for all,” said Ogletree.

“We’ve never had that,” he added. “Now is the time to have it.”