A Simple Case for Slavery Reparations: Title to Slavery’s Fruits Did Not Pass

Document Type

Article

Publication Title

University of Baltimore Law Review

Abstract

This article adds several new ideas to the literature on reparations for slavery.

I argue that the federal government aided and abetted slavery, benefitted from slavery, used slavery, and even purported to legalize slavery. So the federal government owes a debt for slavery. I propose the federal government should pay $100,000 to each living descendant of a Black person held as a slave in America (subject to particular conditions) in exchange for forgiveness and a full and final release of all debts owed for slavery and other racial injustices up to 1900.

When enslaved Black people labored in America, they were entitled to the fruits of their labor. Natural law demands this. But enslavers stole these fruits.

Enslavers never acquired good title to these stolen fruits. So the enslavers could not convey good title when they alienated these stolen fruits.

Ordinarily, a title-cleaning doctrine like “buyer in the ordinary course of business” might cause good title to spring into existence in the hands of an innocent, good-faith purchaser for fair-market value, ignorant of the theft.

But I argue that slavery was so prevalent and notorious that no one downstream could satisfy the BIOC elements, at least not until the wealth was diffused throughout the American economy.

I propose a burden-shifting approach to proving enslaved ancestry, given the widespread nature of slavery in America and the major gaps in the records.

I offer a perspective on slavery reparations as a reasonable, workable compromise. I show that cash payments for full-and-final slavery reparations would be both earthshaking and feasible. And I address common arguments against reparations.

First Page

275

Last Page

348

Publication Date

12-1-2025

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS