ATLRepair AtlantaReparations Study Commission

Study · Framework · 8 min read

Who Is Repair For? Eligibility Models

Lineage, documented harm, all Black residents, race-neutral proxies, and program-specific hybrids: the major eligibility models, with each one's live results and legal exposure.

California's task force spent six hours and burned real coalition capital on one vote, 5 to 4, because its members understood that eligibility shapes everything that follows: which remedies are possible, which lawsuits come, who feels seen, and who feels erased.[1] The record suggests the decision rewards deliberation rather than drift.

Model 1 · Lineage / descendancy

Definition: descendants of people enslaved in the U.S. (California added: or of free Black people in the U.S. before 1900).[1] Darity and Mullen add a check against opportunism: to qualify, a person must have identified as Black on legal documents for at least 12 years before the program was enacted.[2][3]

Who used it: the California Task Force (March 2022, 5-4);[1] the resulting Bureau for Descendants of American Slavery (2025), the nation's first state reparations agency, exists to verify descendancy as the doorway to all future benefits;[4][5] St. Paul's permanent commission is chartered explicitly for "American descendants of chattel slavery."[6][7]

The case for: constitutional scholars (Chemerinsky, testifying to California) argue lineage is a race-neutral category likelier to survive the strict review courts give race-based programs, and that it centers the specific crime of slavery and its unpaid debt.[1]

The case against: four of nine California members argued all 2.6M Black Californians carry slavery's legacy regardless of documentable ancestry, and that paperwork burdens fall hardest on people whose ancestors were property in the records, not persons.[1] Plaintiffs in Flinn v. Evanston, now joined by the U.S. DOJ, argue descendancy is simply a stand-in for race.[8] The courts will answer in the Evanston case.

Model 2 · Documented local harm (and descendants)

Definition: people directly harmed by specific municipal acts, and their descendants. Evanston: Black residents of 1919-1969 (the window between the city's discriminatory zoning and its fair-housing ordinance) plus direct descendants.[9] Chicago: Burge torture survivors and families.[10] St. Louis's report: former residents and descendants of Pruitt-Igoe and Mill Creek Valley.[11] Palm Springs: verified Section 14 survivors and descendants.[12]

The case for: this is the strongest traditional legal footing. SFFA left open exactly this possibility (a government repairing discrimination it can document itself committing),[13] and victim-defined classes (Burge) have never been constitutionally challenged. It is also the easiest to verify: residency documents, displacement rolls, deeds.

The case against: it excludes people harmed outside the documented time periods (Evanston's post-1969 group was never put into practice)[14] and requires the harm record to exist first. This is why advocates treat the harm report as the legal foundation of the program.

Atlanta fit: the city's documented harms come with rolls, including urban renewal relocation records, Techwood/Olympic-era displacement, annexation-era takings, and convict-lease court records.[15][16] A descendant registry opened now would build the class while research proceeds.

Model 3 · All Black residents

Who used it: Amherst, MA (present-day structural racism rationale);[17] the NJ Reparations Council's position (descendants and Black immigrants subjected to structural racism).[18]

The case for: the harm is communal and ongoing, documentation burdens are inequitable, and solidarity matters more than boundary-drawing.[17][18]

The case against: the highest legal risk after the SFFA and Fearless Fund rulings,[13][19] and William Darity's criticism that it disconnects reparations from the specific debt owed for slavery.[2]

Model 4 · Race-neutral proxies

Who used it: Providence, where ARPA rules forced eligibility by qualified census tract or income regardless of race, meaning white residents could qualify.[20] A commissioner: "White people should not be included for reparations."[20] An organizer: "It's not reparations… it is city funds… to fund an anti-poverty program."[21] L.A. REPAIR and Illinois' R3 use geography.[22][23]

The case for: near-immunity from constitutional challenge, and it can be delivered now.

The case against: the tradeoff documented in Providence, a program that survives court while losing meaning for its intended community.[21] Providence spent less than 3% of its fund in year one and sunsets with its federal dollars.[24]

Model 5 · Program-specific hybrid

Definition: different remedies have different eligibility rules. Restitution goes to named heirs of documented takings; descendant programs sit behind lineage verification; place-based investment targets harm geographies; universal-access institutions (a healing center, a curriculum) stay open to all.

Who used it: San Francisco's 2-of-8 criteria design moved in this direction;[25] Tulsa's trust serves massacre survivors, descendants, and Greenwood and North Tulsa residents and businesses through different funds;[26] most fully developed recommendations end up somewhere in this territory.

The case for: if one track is struck down, the others still stand, and each remedy gets its strongest legal theory.

The case against: administrative complexity, and the risk that the boldest parts quietly go unfunded.

Verification, which every model depends on

Whatever the anchor, verification support decides who actually gets through the door:

  • Free genealogy offices (California's Bureau includes one; its CSU research grant funds methodology).[4][27]
  • Generous documentary standards. Evanston accepted phone books, church records, yearbooks, obituaries, and family Bibles, with staff on-site helping elders apply.[9][28]
  • Community verification boards for records destroyed or never made.
  • Descendant registries opened early. Tulsa's DNA program actively solicits descendant swabs to identify 1921 victims;[29] Bruce's Beach required county genealogists to trace heirs before restitution was possible.[30]
  • Partnerships: AAHGS chapters, the Auburn Avenue Research Library, and the Fulton task force's claimed enslaver/enslaved database, which the City could reuse.[16]

The survey asks for Atlanta's anchor model and its verification commitments separately, because a generous anchor paired with burdensome paperwork narrows a program well below its stated reach.

References

  1. CalMatters, "Task force: California reparations for slavery descendants only" (March 2022), calmatters.org. Accessed July 2026.
  2. William A. Darity Jr. and A. Kirsten Mullen, From Here to Equality: Reparations for Black Americans in the Twenty-First Century (2020).
  3. William A. Darity Jr. and A. Kirsten Mullen, "A Program of Black Reparations," nonprofitquarterly.org. Accessed July 2026.
  4. California Legislature, "SB-518 Descendants of enslaved persons: reparations" (chaptered Oct. 10, 2025), leginfo.legislature.ca.gov. Accessed July 2026.
  5. California Legislative Black Caucus, "Governor Newsom Signs Landmark Bill Creating Slavery Descendants Bureau" (October 2025), blackcaucus.legislature.ca.gov. Accessed July 2026.
  6. City of Saint Paul, "Saint Paul Recovery Act Community Reparations Commission," stpaul.gov. Accessed July 2026.
  7. Sahan Journal, "St. Paul commission tackles reparations for descendants of enslaved people" (January 2023), sahanjournal.com. Accessed July 2026.
  8. Evanston RoundTable, "Evanston's reparations plan faces constitutional challenge" (June 16, 2026), evanstonroundtable.com. Accessed July 2026.
  9. City of Evanston, "Local Reparations: Restorative Housing Program Guidelines," cityofevanston.civicweb.net. Accessed July 2026.
  10. Chicago Sun-Times, "City Council approves $5.5 million in reparations for Burge torture victims" (May 6, 2015), chicago.suntimes.com. Accessed July 2026.
  11. St. Louis Public Radio, "St. Louis Reparations Commission recommends grants and policy reforms in final report" (October 15, 2024), stlpr.org. Accessed July 2026.
  12. NBC Palm Springs, "Palm Springs Reaches $5.9 Million Settlement with Section 14 Survivors, Honoring Historical Injustices" (November 13, 2024), nbcpalmsprings.com. Accessed July 2026.
  13. Supreme Court of the United States, Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, 600 U.S. 181 (2023) (slip opinion), supremecourt.gov. Accessed July 2026.
  14. The Daily Northwestern, "'Too little, too late': Black residents disillusioned by pace of Evanston reparations program" (February 2, 2023), dailynorthwestern.com. Accessed July 2026.
  15. Fulton County Reparations Task Force, "Harm Report" (2025), fultoncountyga.gov (PDF). Accessed July 2026.
  16. Fulton County Reparations Task Force, meeting minutes, March 7, 2024 (slavery research update: names of every enslaver from the 1850/1860 slave schedules and of enslaved people extracted from probate and tax records), fultoncountyga.gov. Accessed July 2026.
  17. Town of Amherst, "African Heritage Reparation Assembly of Amherst Unveils Reparations Plan for Black Residents" (press release, September 26, 2023), amherstma.gov. Accessed July 2026.
  18. The Jersey Bee, "Advocates will propose a reparations plan for New Jersey. Here is what residents should know" (August 12, 2024), jerseybee.org. Accessed July 2026.
  19. NPR, "Fearless Fund is shutting down its contested Strivers Grant program" (September 11, 2024), npr.org. Accessed July 2026.
  20. WPRI 12 News, "Ambitious reparations program, but no direct payments, recommended in Prov." (July 26, 2022), wpri.com. Accessed July 2026.
  21. ABC News, "Providence establishes reparations program to praise and criticism" (January 31, 2023), abcnews.go.com. Accessed July 2026.
  22. City of Los Angeles Civil + Human Rights and Equity Department, "L.A. REPAIR Participatory Budgeting," civilandhumanrights.lacity.gov. Accessed July 2026.
  23. Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, "Eligibility | Restore, Reinvest, Renew (R3)," r3.illinois.gov. Accessed July 2026.
  24. The Boston Globe, "Providence reparations program will move forward under Smiley" (November 2, 2023), bostonglobe.com. Accessed July 2026.
  25. San Francisco African American Reparations Advisory Committee, draft San Francisco Reparations Plan (December 2022), sf.gov. Accessed July 2026.
  26. City of Tulsa, "The Greenwood Trust — Tulsa's Road to Repair," cityoftulsa.org. Accessed July 2026.
  27. CalMatters, "Newsom OKs CA reparations office but vetoes 5 related bills" (October 2025), calmatters.org. Accessed July 2026.
  28. Evanston RoundTable, "Restorative housing: What to know about the application process" (September 20, 2021), evanstonroundtable.com. Accessed July 2026.
  29. City of Tulsa, "1921 Graves Investigation," cityoftulsa.org. Accessed July 2026.
  30. Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, "Report Back on Returning Bruce's Beach to its Rightful Owners" (board memo, June 21, 2022), file.lacounty.gov. Accessed July 2026.

Put it to work

Answer the questions this brief informs →

Keep reading

Building the Harm Record: Methods That Held Up →