Commentary

COMMENTARY: Pulling back the curtain on legal double standards

MINNESOTA SPOKESMAN-RECORDER — It’s time we stop lying to ourselves. The lying has gone on much too long and every time the lie is repeated, we are all the worse for it.

Published

7 years ago

March 13, 2019

Oscar H. Blayton

By Oscar H. Blayton

It’s time we stop lying to ourselves. The lying has gone on much too long and every time the lie is repeated, we are all the worse for it. The lie is that in America, everyone is equal under the law.

It’s time to pull back the curtain on this lie, but in order to do so, first, we must have an understanding of what “law” actually is.

In its most basic form, “law” is a process of authoritative control whereby certain members of a particular community establish and maintain a specific public order.

This definition may seem like a mouthful, but history can help us unpack it. Nazi Germany had anti-Jewish laws, the racist regime of South Africa had apartheid laws and the southern states in this country had Jim Crow laws.

The Nazis, the Afrikaners, and the Southern segregationists all had authoritative control over their respective national and state communities. With that control, they each ordered their societies in the manner they desired.

In each of these instances, it is not difficult to identify those community members who sought to maintain a specific public order, nor is it difficult to identify the “specific order” they sought to maintain.

For Blacks in South Africa and the segregated southern United States, subjugation was the public order. And in the case of Jews living under Nazi control, it was extermination. For these people, those were the laws.

A law need not be just or fair or benign to be the law. Law, like a gun or any other tool, can be used for good or for evil.

To disguise the fact that laws can be cruel, unjust and designed to harm certain members of our community, the myth of “blind justice” was created. It fostered the notion of a fair legal system in America, but observations in most American courtrooms will instruct us that what passes for justice in this country is not color-blind.

American laws are written with high-sounding words, full of dignity and sensibility — but words are not deeds. And, as in courtrooms, the long arm of the law, embodied in the form of law enforcement officers, reaches out into the streets and neighborhoods where we witness the double standards that are applied in enforcing our laws written in lofty language.

Even though the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution ended slavery more than 150 years ago, people of color are still forced to wear the proverbial shackles of the double standards in our country’s legal system. Bigots and racists use our system of laws and law enforcement to police Black and Brown bodies, making it clear to people of color that we are neither welcome nor expected to exist in White spaces.

Ohio maintains a specific public order that allows Whites to walk the streets with automatic rifles unmolested by the police but justifies gunning down a Black man who is purchasing a BB rifle in an open carry state. It also finds no fault in a police officer executing a 12-year-old Black boy for playing with a toy gun in a park. This is the law in Ohio.

Many other cities and states maintain a specific public order that targets people of color for fines and the confiscation of property in order to fund local and state governments.

Ferguson, Mo. was proven to use the disproportionate levying of fines on people of color to fund their municipal activities. That was the law in Ferguson.

South Carolina’s civil forfeiture law allows police to confiscate money and property from people merely suspected of having committed a crime. This is often done without a trial, and in some instances, without even an arrest.

Black men are subjected to this law at a rate vastly disproportionate to their numbers in the general population. A statewide journalism project in South Carolina titled “TAKEN” reports that while comprising only 13 percent of that state’s population, Black men represent 65 percent of all citizens targeted for civil forfeiture. This is still the law in South Carolina.

The slave codes, the Fugitive Slave Act, and the Jim Crow laws of years past and the gutting of the Voting Rights Act just a few short years ago are all part of a process of authoritative control by certain community members to establish and maintain a specific public order that keeps people of color in shackles. There are many more laws that do this, but the list is too long to discuss in this short commentary.

We must pull back the curtain to determine the true public order purpose of each law governing our lives and to identify those community members who seek to establish and maintain them. Once we do this, then we can ask ourselves, if this is the America we want for ourselves. And if not, what are we going to do about it?

Oscar H. Blayton is a former Marine Corps combat pilot and human rights activist who practices law in Virginia.

This article originally appeared in the Minnesota Spokesman-Recorder.

Oscar H. Blayton

Posts by Oscar H. Blayton

Up Next

Black Business Spotlight: Angie’s Hats

Don't Miss

UNCF Delivers First ‘State of HBCUs’ Address in Washington

Oscar H. Blayton

Click to comment

Bay Area

Oakland Mayor Pushes Charter Overhaul to Clarify Roles in City Government, Increase Accountability and Improve Service Delivery

Under the proposal, the mayor would serve as Oakland’s chief executive, overseeing city departments, implementing policy, proposing the annual budget, and managing day-to-day operations. The measure would also give the mayor veto power over legislation and the budget, though the City Council could override a veto with a two-thirds vote.

Published

1 day ago

May 17, 2026

Oakland Post

Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee. File photo.

By Oakland Post Staff

Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee is backing a sweeping proposal to restructure Oakland’s government, arguing the changes would make City Hall more accountable and improve the delivery of basic services like public safety, homelessness response, and infrastructure repairs.

The charter reform measure, introduced April 7 and co-sponsored by Oakland City Council President Kevin Jenkins, would ask voters in November to approve a “strong mayor, strong council” system designed to create clearer lines of authority inside city government.

The City Council, meanwhile, would maintain legislative authority by adopting ordinances, approving budgets, conducting oversight hearings, and confirming key mayoral appointments. The proposal would also create an Independent Budget and Legislative Analyst Office to provide nonpartisan fiscal and policy analysis for councilmembers.

“I’ve spent months listening to Oaklanders across every neighborhood about what they expect from their city government,” Lee said. “The Charter Reform Working Group’s engagement made clear that residents want a system where there are no questions about who is responsible for delivering results on public safety, homelessness, infrastructure, and basic services.”

Jenkins said the proposal would strengthen both executive leadership and council oversight.

“I’ve long believed Oakland works best when residents have clear lines of accountability and a government structure that aligns responsibility with results,” Jenkins said.

The proposal follows recommendations from the Mayor’s Charter Reform Working Group, co-facilitated by the League of Women Voters of Oakland and SPUR.

Over five months, the group conducted more than 60 interviews, held 14 public meetings across Oakland, and engaged more than 750 residents while reviewing governance models used in other cities.

“The process of engaging residents across Oakland surfaced the governance clarity Oakland needs,” said Sujata Srivastava of SPUR. “The Charter Reform Working Group has produced a thoughtful set of recommendations that if adopted could strengthen accountability and improve service delivery across city government.”

Polling cited by the mayor’s office suggests voters may be open to the changes. A February 2026 poll by the East Bay Polling Institute found 64% of voters support adopting a strong-mayor system. Separate polling conducted by the Oakland Chamber of Commerce and David Binder Research found support ranging from 61% to 63% among likely voters.

The measure is scheduled to be heard by the City Council Rules Committee on May 21. If approved by the council, it would appear on the November 2026 ballot, where Oakland voters would have the final say.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

The Ladies of Delta Sigma Theta Hold Day of Advocacy at the Capitol in Sacramento

A member of the “Divine Nine,” Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc., was founded on Jan. 13, 1913, at Howard University in Washington, D.C. The organization was established by 22 women who sought to shift the group’s focus from social activities to public service, academic excellence, and social activism.

Published

1 day ago

May 17, 2026

Oakland Post

Sen. Laura Richardson (D-San Pedro) presents a Senate resolution to the Delta Theta Sigma Sorority Farwest Region at the State Capitol on May 4. Photo courtesy of the Senate Rules Committee.

By Antonio Ray Harvey, California Black Media

On May 4, members of the Farwest Region of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc., convened at the California State Capitol for the organization’s 23rd annual Delta Days in Sacramento.

The two-day advocacy event brings together chapters from across California to engage directly in the legislative process, connect with lawmakers, and advocate for policies impacting Black communities.

Members of the sorority were honored on the Senate floor by Sen. Laura Richardson (D-San Pedro), who is also a member of Delta Sigma Theta.

Richardson welcomed the Farwest Region during the presentation of a Senate resolution recognizing outgoing Regional Director Kimberly Usher for her leadership and service.

“In addition to the Far West Region, we are led by a fearless leader, regional director Kimberly Usher. She has now served her full term of what’s allowed,” Richardson said. “We are going to be having our regional conference, but we wanted to give it to her here, officially recognizing her service.”

The resolution was co-authored by Richardson and fellow members of the California Legislative Black Caucus (CLBC) and Delta Sigma Theta, Sen. Akilah Weber Pierson (D-San Diego) and Assemblymember Rhodesia Ransom (D-Stockton).

Usher has served in the leadership role since 2022.

“We are founded on sisterhood that is deeply rooted in scholarship, service, and social action,” said Weber Pierson, a member of the Gamma Alpha chapter of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority.

“Today, we continue a legacy of empowering communities and upholding the high cultural, intellectual, and moral standards established by our founders over a century ago,” she added.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

Rep. Kamlager-Dove Introduces Bill to Protect Women in Custody After Reports Detailing Miscarriages and Neglect

The Pregnant Women in Custody Act would expand safeguards beyond the federal prison system to include women detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the Office of Refugee Resettlement. The proposal follows reports of pregnant women being shackled, denied medical care and suffering miscarriages while in immigration detention.

Published

1 day ago

May 17, 2026

Oakland Post

iStock

By Bo Tefu, California Black Media

Congresswoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA-37) on May 7, reintroduced updated legislation aimed at strengthening protections and healthcare standards for pregnant and postpartum women held in federal custody, including in immigration detention facilities.

The Pregnant Women in Custody Act would expand safeguards beyond the federal prison system to include women detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the Office of Refugee Resettlement. The proposal follows reports of pregnant women being shackled, denied medical care and suffering miscarriages while in immigration detention.

The legislation builds on a bipartisan version previously passed by the House during the 117th Congress. The updated bill includes new standards for healthcare access, mental health and substance use treatment, high-risk pregnancy care, family unity protections and increased federal oversight.

“Proper pregnancy care is a human right, regardless of your immigration or incarceration status,” Kamlager-Dove said in a statement. “It’s unacceptable that there are virtually no legal safeguards for pregnant women in federal custody.”

The bill would also limit the use of restraints and restrictive housing for pregnant women, improve data collection on maternal health in custody and require additional staff training and enforcement measures.

Supporters of the measure said the legislation is intended to address long-standing concerns about maternal healthcare and safety in detention settings, particularly for Black women and low-income women who are disproportionately impacted by incarceration and health disparities.

“Pregnant women in custody should never be subjected to dangerous and inhumane treatment that threatens their health, dignity, or the well-being of their babies,” said Patrice Willoughby, chief of policy and legislative affairs for the NAACP and a longtime public policy and government affairs strategist, in a statement.

A 2021 report estimated there are about 58,000 admissions of pregnant women into U.S. jails and prisons each year. Kamlager’s statement also cited a recent investigation by NBC News and Bloomberg Law that identified allegations of severe mistreatment or medical neglect involving at least 54 pregnant women or families in county jails between 2017 and 2024.

Federal policy under the Department of Homeland Security restricts the detention of pregnant, postpartum and nursing immigrants except in extreme cases. However, the agency reported that ICE deported 363 pregnant, postpartum or nursing women between January 2025 and February 2026, including 16 recorded miscarriages during that period.

The bill is cosponsored by several House Democrats and backed by organizations including the NAACP and the Vera Institute of Justice.