#NNPA BlackPress

COMMENTARY: Black Lives Mattered. Then America Moved On

SACRAMENTO OBSERVER — The Manhattan jury trying the second-degree murder case unanimously agreed with Penny: Neely, a homeless man dealing with mental illness and substance abuse, was a threat to others on the subway car that day, and Penny, a former Marine with a lethal chokehold, should not be held criminally responsible for killing him.

Published

3 months ago

December 23, 2024

admin

By Joseph Williams | Word In Black | Sacramento Observer

Overview: The killing of George Floyd was a watershed moment, a rare instance in which the white killer of an unarmed Black man was held to account. But four years later, the pattern of white men absolved for the death of Black men seemingly has returned.

Four years ago, a white man suffocated George Floyd, a Black man, to death on a gritty Minneapolis street corner as bystanders begged for mercy. That brutal killing of an unarmed Floyd — caught on camera — turbocharged the Black Lives Matter movement, put the phrase “white privilege” into the national lexicon and inspired philanthropists to throw bushels of money at social justice nonprofits.

A year later, Derek Chauvin, a Minneapolis police officer whose job included training rookies, was convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to 22 years and 6 months in prison — a rare instance of accountability and introspection in America’s long history of racist, systemic violence.

Monday brought us yet another reminder of how fleeting that reckoning truly was when a white man was found not guilty of suffocating Jordan Neely, a 30-year-old Black man, to death on the floor of a grimy New York subway train as bystanders called for mercy.

The acquittal of Daniel Penny — already a vigilante hero among the far right — comes just weeks after Donald Trump defeated Kamala Harris for the presidency in a racist campaign, Walmart became the biggest U.S. employer to shut down its DEI program, and social justice nonprofits realized philanthropists are closing their checkbooks to avoid Trump’s enemies list.

Reasonable Doubt

The Manhattan jury trying the second-degree murder case unanimously agreed with Penny: Neely, a homeless man dealing with mental illness and substance abuse, was a threat to others on the subway car that day, and Penny, a former Marine with a lethal chokehold, should not be held criminally responsible for killing him.

“What are we going to do, people? What’s going to happen to us now? I’ve had enough of this. The system is rigged.”Andre Zachary Neely’s father

Never mind that the killing happened in broad daylight, in front of many eyewitnesses, and was also recorded on a cellphone camera. Or that when Penny attacked him, Neely hadn’t committed an actual crime or put hands on anyone. Or that Neely was unarmed, that no lives were in danger, that passengers pleaded for Penny to let Neely go, that Penny kept McNeely in a chokehold for nearly five full minutes, maintaining it long after McNeely stopped struggling.

The jury saw and heard and processed all that evidence and — following roughly 17 hours of deliberation, including deadlocking over a lesser charge — collectively shrugged.

They believed what Penny told detectives: “I wasn’t trying to injure him. I’m just trying to keep him from hurting anybody else. He was threatening people.”

With that, Penny essentially said the magic word, the 11-letter, three-syllable, get-out-of-jail-free card that justifies the taking of a Black person’s life: threatening.

“It hurts, it really, really hurts,” Andre Zachary, Neely’s father, told reporters outside the courthouse after the verdict. “What are we going to do, people? What’s going to happen to us now? I’ve had enough of this. The system is rigged.”

Tragic Life and Death

A homeless Michael Jackson impersonator, Neely had been hearing voices and raging in public for about 10 years; his symptoms surfaced not long after his mother was murdered by a jealous and controlling boyfriend when her son was just 14. That sent McNeely on a downward spiral: jail, substance use, stays at psychiatric hospitals.

It all ended after his encounter with Penny, an architecture student at New York City College of Technology. Penny would have faced up to four years in prison for a criminally negligent homicide conviction and up to 15 years for a manslaughter conviction.

Now that he’s been acquitted, Penny is likely to become the next hero of the far right, a soon-to-be Fox News icon who saved the day by selflessly killing a mentally ill, homeless, unarmed Black man because the man made people feel unsafe.

But the verdict slams the door on the George Floyd Era, all five metaphorical minutes of it.

Examples abound: the Supreme Court’s dismantling of affirmative action in college admissions; state and local laws restricting the teaching of Black history; corporations turning their backs on diversity, equity and inclusion.

Last week, two white police officers were acquitted for killing Herman Whitfield III, an unarmed Black man who died after they restrained and tased him to death.

And let’s not forget Trump, who ran an explicitly racist campaign to defeat Harris, the first Black vice president and the first Black woman to run for president atop a major party’s ticket.

The More Things Change

Ultimately, Neely’s death will become a footnote, more or less, in the oral history, and presumed demise, of the Black Lives Matter movement. After all, his death didn’t trigger a reaction; although the case made national headlines it came amid heightened fear of violence in New York, particularly among subway riders.

When Floyd was murdered, it set off protests worldwide, and Chauvin’s trial drew international coverage. By contrast, the New York chapter of Black Lives Matter could barely scrape together more than a handful of protesters to demonstrate during Penny’s trial.

Ginia Bellafonte, a columnist for the New York Times, noted that 38 years ago, in the same Manhattan courthouse, subway vigilante Bernhard Goetz, a white man, was acquitted for shooting four young black men on the subway whom he thought was going to rob him; a Times poll found a majority of New Yorkers agreed with the verdict.

In 2013, a juror who voted to acquit George Zimmerman of murder charges for killing Trayvon Martin, a Black teenager, said she had no doubt Zimmerman, a self-styled neighborhood vigilante, feared for his life. And study after study shows Black males are typically seen as larger and more threatening than they actually are.

In other words, in 1977 and 2013, juries have told white men it’s OK to use deadly force if you believe a young Black man is going to harm you. George Floyd’s murder was supposed to change all that.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

admin

Posts by admin

Up Next

California State Gov and Advocacy Orgs Are Empowering Domestic Abuse Survivors on Path to Healing

Don't Miss

Black Teacher Settles Lawsuit Against Southland School District

admin

Click to comment

#NNPA BlackPress

Recently Approved Budget Plan Favors Wealthy, Slashes Aid to Low-Income Americans

BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — The most significant benefits would flow to the highest earners while millions of low-income families face cuts

Published

2 days ago

March 21, 2025

Stacy M. Brown

By Stacy M. Brown

BlackPressUSA.com Senior National Correspondent

The new budget framework approved by Congress may result in sweeping changes to the federal safety net and tax code. The most significant benefits would flow to the highest earners while millions of low-income families face cuts. A new analysis from Yale University’s Budget Lab shows the proposals in the House’s Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Resolution would lead to a drop in after-tax-and-transfer income for the poorest households while significantly boosting revenue for the wealthiest Americans. Last month, Congress passed its Concurrent Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2025 (H. Con. Res. 14), setting revenue and spending targets for the next decade. The resolution outlines $1.5 trillion in gross spending cuts and $4.5 trillion in tax reductions between FY2025 and FY2034, along with $500 billion in unspecified deficit reduction.

Congressional Committees have now been instructed to identify policy changes that align with these goals. Three of the most impactful committees—Agriculture, Energy and Commerce, and Ways and Means—have been tasked with proposing major changes. The Agriculture Committee is charged with finding $230 billion in savings, likely through changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps. Energy and Commerce must deliver $880 billion in savings, likely through Medicaid reductions. Meanwhile, the Ways and Means Committee must craft tax changes totaling no more than $4.5 trillion in new deficits, most likely through extending provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Although the resolution does not specify precise changes, reports suggest lawmakers are eyeing steep cuts to SNAP and Medicaid benefits while seeking to make permanent tax provisions that primarily benefit high-income individuals and corporations.

To examine the potential real-world impact, Yale’s Budget Lab modeled four policy changes that align with the resolution’s goals:

A 30 percent across-the-board cut in SNAP funding.
A 15 percent cut in Medicaid funding.
Permanent extension of the individual and estate tax cuts from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
Permanent extension of business tax provisions including 100% bonus depreciation, expense of R&D, and relaxed limits on interest deductions.

Yale researchers determined that the combined effect of these policies would reduce the after-tax-and-transfer income of the bottom 20 percent of earners by 5 percent in the calendar year 2026. Households in the middle would see a modest 0.6 percent gain. However, the top five percent of earners would experience a 3 percent increase in their after-tax-and-transfer income.

Moreover, the analysis concluded that more than 100 percent of the net fiscal benefit from these changes would go to households in the top 20 percent of the income distribution. This happens because lower-income groups would lose more in government benefits than they would gain from any tax cuts. At the same time, high-income households would enjoy significant tax reductions with little or no loss in benefits.

“These results indicate a shift in resources away from low-income tax units toward those with higher incomes,” the Budget Lab report states. “In particular, making the TCJA provisions permanent for high earners while reducing spending on SNAP and Medicaid leads to a regressive overall effect.” The report notes that policymakers have floated a range of options to reduce SNAP and Medicaid outlays, such as lowering per-beneficiary benefits or tightening eligibility rules. While the Budget Lab did not assess each proposal individually, the modeling assumes legislation consistent with the resolution’s instructions. “The burden of deficit reduction would fall largely on those least able to bear it,” the report concluded.

Stacy M. Brown

Posts by Stacy M. Brown

#NNPA BlackPress

A Threat to Pre-emptive Pardons

BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — it was a possibility that the preemptive pardons would not happen because of the complicated nature of that never-before-enacted process.

Published

2 days ago

March 21, 2025

Oakland Post

By April Ryan

President Trump is working to undo the traditional presidential pardon powers by questioning the Biden administration’s pre-emptive pardons issued just days before January 20, 2025. President Trump is seeking retribution against the January 6th House Select Committee. The Trump Justice Department has been tasked to find loopholes to overturn the pardons that could lead to legal battles for the Republican and Democratic nine-member committee. Legal scholars and those closely familiar with the pardon process worked with the Biden administration to ensure the preemptive pardons would stand against any retaliatory knocks from the incoming Trump administration. A source close to the Biden administration’s pardons said, in January 2025, “I think pardons are all valid. The power is unreviewable by the courts.”

However, today that same source had a different statement on the nuances of the new Trump pardon attack. That attack places questions about Biden’s use of an autopen for the pardons. The Trump argument is that Biden did not know who was pardoned as he did not sign the documents. Instead, the pardons were allegedly signed by an autopen. The same source close to the pardon issue said this week, “unless he [Trump] can prove Biden didn’t know what was being done in his name. All of this is in uncharted territory. “ Meanwhile, an autopen is used to make automatic or remote signatures. It has been used for decades by public figures and celebrities.

Months before the Biden pardon announcement, those in the Biden White House Counsel’s Office, staff, and the Justice Department were conferring tirelessly around the clock on who to pardon and how. The concern for the preemptive pardons was how to make them irrevocable in an unprecedented process. At one point in the lead-up to the preemptive pardon releases, it was a possibility that the preemptive pardons would not happen because of the complicated nature of that never-before-enacted process. President Trump began the threat of an investigation for the January 6th Select Committee during the Hill proceedings. Trump has threatened members with investigation or jail.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

#NNPA BlackPress

Reaction to The Education EO

BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — Meanwhile, the new Education EO jeopardizes funding for students seeking a higher education. Duncan states, PellGrants are in jeopardy after servicing “6.5 million people” giving them a chance to go to college.

Published

2 days ago

March 21, 2025

Oakland Post

By April Ryan

There are plenty of negative reactions to President Donald Trump’s latest Executive Order abolishing the Department of Education. As Democrats call yesterday’s action performative, it would take an act of Congress for the Education Department to close permanently. “This blatantly unconstitutional executive order is just another piece of evidence that Trump has absolutely no respect for the Constitution,” said Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) who is the ranking member on the House Financial Services Committee. “By dismantling ED, President Trump is implementing his own philosophy on education, which can be summed up in his own words, ‘I love the poorly educated.’ I am adamantly opposed to this reckless action, said Rep. Bobby Scott who is the most senior Democrat on the House Education and Workforce Committee.

Morgan State University President Dr. David Wilson chimed in saying “I’m deeply concerned about efforts to shift federal oversight in education back to the states, particularly regarding equity, justice, and fairness. History has shown us what happens when states are left unchecked—Black and poor children are too often denied access to the high-quality education they deserve. In 1979 then President Jimmy Carter signed a law creating the Department of Education. Arne Duncan, former Obama Education Secretary, reminds us that both Democratic and Republican presidents have kept education a non-political issue until now. However, Duncan stressed Republican presidents have contributed greatly to moving education forward in this country.

During a CNN interview this week Duncan said during the Civil War President Abraham “Lincoln created the land grant system” for colleges like Tennessee State University. “President Ford brought in IDEA.” And “Nixon signed Pell Grants into law.” In 2001, the No Child Left Behind Act was signed into law by President George W. Bush which increased federal oversight of schools through standardized testing. Meanwhile, the new Education EO jeopardizes funding for students seeking higher education. Duncan states, PellGrants are in jeopardy after servicing “6.5 million people” giving them a chance to go to college. Wilson details, “that 40 percent of all college students rely on Pell Grants and student loans.”

Rep. Alma Adams (D-NC) says this Trump action “impacts students pursuing higher education and threatens 26 million students across the country, taking billions away from their educational futures. Meanwhile, During the president’s speech in the East Room of the White House Thursday, Trump criticized Baltimore City, and its math test scores with critical words. Governor West Moore, who is opposed to the EO action, said about dismantling the Department of Education, “Leadership means lifting people up, not punching them down.”