Title

A Role for Courts in Reparations

Document Type

Article

Abstract

This paper begins with a five-factor model that explains why some groups, particularly Black America, are unable to garner widespread public or congressional support for a claim based on either slavery or segregation. While many decry this reality as proof of the deficiency of a claim, this paper counters with three successive arguments: 1) The legislative process is not an arbiter of merit; 2) Numerous reparations claims, such as those prominently put forth by black America, may carry as much moral weight as those from Japanese American internees; and 3) Since the country evidently supports the giving of reparations, the federal judiciary would be a better forum than the legislature for bringing fairness and finality to claims – even when rejecting claims. After highlighting the legal barriers to this proposal, this paper concludes by arguing that Article 3 is in fact a broad grant of institutional power, establishing a system of courts capable and well-designed to hear such claims.

Date of Authorship for this Version

December 2006