Subscribe to Restore Accountability Blog
Subscribe to Restore Accountability Blog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
<100 subscribers
<100 subscribers
https://tinyurl.com/reparate-sb189 - Change version - with pictures.
FreedmAn (https://thelawdictionary.org/freedman/)...
Negro
Black American…
https://www.familysearch.org/en/
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB189 & https://www.regulations.gov/document/OMB-2023-0001-0001
This bill would, commencing January 1, 2024, require the State Controller’s Office, to the extent the office has completed the functionality necessary, and the Department of Human Resources, when collecting demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of Californians hired into state employment, to use additional collection categories and tabulations for specified Black or African American groups. The bill would require inclusion of that data in the Annual Census of Employees in State Civil Service report published or released on or after January 1, 2025, as specified.
(15) Existing law requires the Controller to, among other duties, establish and maintain a payroll of all persons employed by every state agency except the University of California. Existing law, the State Civil Service Act, regulates employment with the state and vests in the Department of Human Resources all powers, duties, and authority necessary to operate the state civil service system.
Existing law requires any state agency, board, or commission that directly or by contract collects demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of Californians to use separate collection categories and tabulations for major Asian and Pacific Islander groups, as specified.
This bill would, commencing January 1, 2024, require the State Controller’s Office, to the extent the office has completed the functionality necessary, and the Department of Human Resources, when collecting demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of Californians hired into state employment, to use additional collection categories and tabulations for specified Black or African American groups. The bill would require inclusion of that data in the Annual Census of Employees in State Civil Service report published or released on or after January 1, 2025, as specified.
(16) Existing law, the Technology Act of 2005, establishes the Department of Technology within the Government Operations Agency, supervised by the Director of Technology. Within the department, existing law established the Office of Technology Services. Existing law requires the director to propose to the Director of Finance rates for the Office of Technology Services’ services based on a formal rate methodology. Existing law requires the Director of Finance to approve the proposal based on the reasonableness of the rates and any significant impact on departmental budgets.
8310.6. (a) On or after January 1, 2024, the State Controller’s Office, to the extent the State Controller’s Office has completed the functionality necessary, and the Department of Human Resources, when collecting demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of persons hired into state employment, shall include the following additional collection categories and tabulations for Black or African American groups, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
(1) African Americans who are descendants of persons who were enslaved in the United States.
(2) Blacks who are not descendants of persons who were enslaved in the United States, including, but not limited to, African Blacks, Caribbean Blacks, and other Blacks.
(3) Unknown or choose not to identify.
(b) The data collected pursuant to the collection categories and tabulations described in subdivision (a) shall be included in the Annual Census of Employees in State Civil Service report published or released on or after January 1, 2025. The data shall be made available to the public in accordance with state and federal law, except for personally identifiable information, which shall be deemed confidential.
(c) For the purposes of this section:
(1) “African Americans who are descendants of persons who were enslaved in the United States” means individuals who self-identify as Black, African American, or American Freedman who have at least one ancestor who was enslaved in the United States.
(2) “African Blacks” means individuals who self-identify as Black and who either immigrated directly from Africa to the United States or who are descendants of such a person and who have no ancestors who were enslaved in the United States.
(3) “American Freedmen” means persons who gained freedom from slavery in the United States or their descendants.
(4) “Caribbean Blacks” means individuals who self-identify as Black and who either left Africa for a Caribbean country before immigrating to the United States or who are descendants of such a person and who have no ancestors who were enslaved in the United States.
(5) “Other Blacks” means individuals who self-identify as Black and who either left Africa to a country not in the Caribbean before immigrating to the United States or who are descendants of such a person and who have no ancestors who were enslaved in the United States.
SEC. 14. Section 8310.6 is added to the Government Code, to read:
8310.6. (a) On or after January 1, 2024, the State Controller’s Office, to the extent the State Controller’s Office has completed the functionality necessary, and the Department of Human Resources, when collecting demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of persons hired into state employment, shall include the following additional collection categories and tabulations for Black or African American groups, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
(1) African Americans who are descendants of persons who were enslaved in the United States.
(2) Blacks who are not descendants of persons who were enslaved in the United States, including, but not limited to, African Blacks, Caribbean Blacks, and other Blacks.
(3) Unknown or choose not to identify.
(b) The data collected pursuant to the collection categories and tabulations described in subdivision (a) shall be included in the Annual Census of Employees in State Civil Service report published or released on or after January 1, 2025. The data shall be made available to the public in accordance with state and federal law, except for personally identifiable information, which shall be deemed confidential.
(c) For the purposes of this section:
(0) “Freedman” means persons who gained freedom from slavery in the United States or their descendants.
(1) “Black Americans who are descendants of persons who were enslaved in the United States” means individuals who self-identify as Black, American Negro, American Freedman, &/or any other Aboriginal Freedman who have at least one ancestor who was enslaved in the United States.
(2) “African Americans who are descendants of persons who were enslaved in the United States” means individuals who self-identify as Black, African American, &/or African Freedman who have at least one ancestor who was enslaved in the United States.
(3) “African Blacks” means individuals who self-identify as Black and who either immigrated directly from Africa to the United States or who are descendants of such a person and who have no ancestors who were enslaved in the United States.
(4) “Caribbean Blacks” means individuals who self-identify as Black and who either left Africa for a Caribbean country before immigrating to the United States or who are descendants of such a person and who have no ancestors who were enslaved in the United States.
(5) “Other Blacks” means individuals who self-identify as Black and who either left Africa to a country not in the Caribbean before immigrating to the United States or who are descendants of such a person and who have no ancestors who were enslaved in the United States.
https://tinyurl.com/reparate-sb189 - Change
https://tinyurl.com/reparate - History
Need help…?
https://thelawdictionary.org/ - 2nd edition
9th Edition definitions…
https://tinyurl.com/negro-slavery
https://tinyurl.com/black-worker
https://thelawdictionary.org/indians/
Individual aboriginal title
Cramer v. United States (1923)
Cramer v. United States (1923) involved would-be Indian reservations (as provided for in the aforementioned unratified treaties) that had subsequently been granted to railroads by the federal government.[65] The United States District Court for the Northern District of California canceled the railroad's land patents based upon the actual use and occupation of the Indians since 1855.[66] The Ninth Circuit agreed with the District Court, but canceled the entirety of the patents at issue.[67]
The Supreme Court considered six arguments by the railroad. First, it rejected the railroad's argument that the exceptions to the grant did not specifically mention Indians; instead, the court held that all land grants are presumed to be granted subject to aboriginal title.[68]
Next, the Court considered the Act of 1851. The Court held that it was irrelevant:
The act plainly has no application. The Indians here concerned do not belong to any of the classes described therein and their claims were in no way derived from the Spanish or Mexican governments. Moreover, it does not appear that these Indians were occupying the lands in question when the act was passed.[69]
Third, the Court rejected the argument that the federal government could not bring suit on behalf of the tribe.[70] Fourth, the Court rejected the statute limiting the time in which the government could challenge the validity of its land patents, holding that did not apply to suits on behalf of Indians.[71] Fifth, the Court rejected estoppel: "Since these Indians with the implied consent of the government had acquired such rights of occupancy as entitled them to retain possession as against the defendants, no officer or agent of the government had authority to deal with the land upon any other theory."[72] Finally, however, the Court reversed the Ninth Circuit's voiding of the entire patents, holding that only the portions possessed by the Indians should be void.[73]
The holding in Cramer lay dormant for many years. Decade later, Justice Douglas dissent to the denial of certiorari where the lower court had denied a California Indian defendant the ability to defend a criminal prosecution for illegal logging on the basis of individual aboriginal title as recognized in Cramer.[74] The Court has since elaborated on the basis for its holding in Cramer:
This holding was based upon the well-understood governmental policy of encouraging the Indian to forgo his wandering habits and adopt those of civilized life; and it was said that to hold that by so doing he acquired no possessory rights to the lands occupied, to which the government would accord protection, would be contrary to the whole spirit of the traditional American policy toward these dependent wards of the nation. The fact that such right of occupancy finds no recognition in any statute or other formal governmental action is not conclusive.[75]
United States v. Dann (1989)
United States v. Dann (1989) is the most in-depth consideration of individual aboriginal title since Cramer.[76] There, although the relevant tribal aboriginal title had been extinguished, and an ordinance prohibited entry onto the federal lands in question, the Court found that the defendants could and did establish individual aboriginal title based on their use of the lands before the ordinance.[77] The Ninth Circuit (in an appeal from Nevada, not California) held:
[An individual] establish[es] aboriginal title in much the same manner that a tribe does. An individual might be able to show that his or her lineal ancestors held and occupied, as individuals, a particular tract of land, to the exclusion of all others, from time immemorial, and that this title had never been extinguished.[78]
However, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the federal policies in place at the time of Cramer had changed and thus:
In short, an Indian cannot today gain a right of occupancy simply by occupying public land, as the Indians did in Cramer. Under current law, that occupancy could not be viewed as undertaken with the implied consent of the government, as was the occupancy in Cramer. We therefore conclude that any individual occupancy rights acquired by the Danns must have had their inception prior to November 26, 1934, the date that the lands in question were withdrawn from entry by Executive Order No. 6910.[79]
Individual aboriginal title is a fact-specific and fact-intensive defense, which is difficult to raise as a criminal affirmative defense, for which the defendant has the burden of proof.[80]
…
https://www.etymonline.com/word/aboriginal
aboriginal (adj.)
1660s, "first, earliest, existing from the beginning," especially in reference to inhabitants of lands colonized by Europeans, from aborigines (see aborigine) + -al (1). The specific Australian sense is attested from 1820. The noun meaning "an original inhabitant, an autochthon" is attested from 1760. Related: Aboriginally; aboriginality (1848); aboriginalism (1859).
aborigine (n.)
"person, animal, or plant that has been in a country or region from earliest times," 1858, mistaken singular of aborigines (1540s; aboriginal is considered the correct singular in English), from Latin aborigines "the first inhabitants," especially of Latium, hence "the first ancestors of the Romans;" possibly a tribal name, or from or made to conform to the Latin phrase ab origine, which means literally "from the beginning."
This is from ab "off, away from" (see ab-) + ablative of origo "a rise, commencement, beginning, source; descent, lineage, birth," from stem of oriri "arise, rise; be born, be descended, receive life" (see origin). Extended 1789 to natives of other countries which Europeans have colonized, especially "aboriginal inhabitant of Australia." Australian slang shortening Abo attested from 1922 (n.), 1906 (adj.).
-al (1)
suffix forming adjectives from nouns or other adjectives, "of, like, related to, pertaining to," Middle English -al, -el, from French or directly from Latin -alis.
https://tinyurl.com/reparate-sb189 - Change version - with pictures.
FreedmAn (https://thelawdictionary.org/freedman/)...
Negro
Black American…
https://www.familysearch.org/en/
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB189 & https://www.regulations.gov/document/OMB-2023-0001-0001
This bill would, commencing January 1, 2024, require the State Controller’s Office, to the extent the office has completed the functionality necessary, and the Department of Human Resources, when collecting demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of Californians hired into state employment, to use additional collection categories and tabulations for specified Black or African American groups. The bill would require inclusion of that data in the Annual Census of Employees in State Civil Service report published or released on or after January 1, 2025, as specified.
(15) Existing law requires the Controller to, among other duties, establish and maintain a payroll of all persons employed by every state agency except the University of California. Existing law, the State Civil Service Act, regulates employment with the state and vests in the Department of Human Resources all powers, duties, and authority necessary to operate the state civil service system.
Existing law requires any state agency, board, or commission that directly or by contract collects demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of Californians to use separate collection categories and tabulations for major Asian and Pacific Islander groups, as specified.
This bill would, commencing January 1, 2024, require the State Controller’s Office, to the extent the office has completed the functionality necessary, and the Department of Human Resources, when collecting demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of Californians hired into state employment, to use additional collection categories and tabulations for specified Black or African American groups. The bill would require inclusion of that data in the Annual Census of Employees in State Civil Service report published or released on or after January 1, 2025, as specified.
(16) Existing law, the Technology Act of 2005, establishes the Department of Technology within the Government Operations Agency, supervised by the Director of Technology. Within the department, existing law established the Office of Technology Services. Existing law requires the director to propose to the Director of Finance rates for the Office of Technology Services’ services based on a formal rate methodology. Existing law requires the Director of Finance to approve the proposal based on the reasonableness of the rates and any significant impact on departmental budgets.
8310.6. (a) On or after January 1, 2024, the State Controller’s Office, to the extent the State Controller’s Office has completed the functionality necessary, and the Department of Human Resources, when collecting demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of persons hired into state employment, shall include the following additional collection categories and tabulations for Black or African American groups, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
(1) African Americans who are descendants of persons who were enslaved in the United States.
(2) Blacks who are not descendants of persons who were enslaved in the United States, including, but not limited to, African Blacks, Caribbean Blacks, and other Blacks.
(3) Unknown or choose not to identify.
(b) The data collected pursuant to the collection categories and tabulations described in subdivision (a) shall be included in the Annual Census of Employees in State Civil Service report published or released on or after January 1, 2025. The data shall be made available to the public in accordance with state and federal law, except for personally identifiable information, which shall be deemed confidential.
(c) For the purposes of this section:
(1) “African Americans who are descendants of persons who were enslaved in the United States” means individuals who self-identify as Black, African American, or American Freedman who have at least one ancestor who was enslaved in the United States.
(2) “African Blacks” means individuals who self-identify as Black and who either immigrated directly from Africa to the United States or who are descendants of such a person and who have no ancestors who were enslaved in the United States.
(3) “American Freedmen” means persons who gained freedom from slavery in the United States or their descendants.
(4) “Caribbean Blacks” means individuals who self-identify as Black and who either left Africa for a Caribbean country before immigrating to the United States or who are descendants of such a person and who have no ancestors who were enslaved in the United States.
(5) “Other Blacks” means individuals who self-identify as Black and who either left Africa to a country not in the Caribbean before immigrating to the United States or who are descendants of such a person and who have no ancestors who were enslaved in the United States.
SEC. 14. Section 8310.6 is added to the Government Code, to read:
8310.6. (a) On or after January 1, 2024, the State Controller’s Office, to the extent the State Controller’s Office has completed the functionality necessary, and the Department of Human Resources, when collecting demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of persons hired into state employment, shall include the following additional collection categories and tabulations for Black or African American groups, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
(1) African Americans who are descendants of persons who were enslaved in the United States.
(2) Blacks who are not descendants of persons who were enslaved in the United States, including, but not limited to, African Blacks, Caribbean Blacks, and other Blacks.
(3) Unknown or choose not to identify.
(b) The data collected pursuant to the collection categories and tabulations described in subdivision (a) shall be included in the Annual Census of Employees in State Civil Service report published or released on or after January 1, 2025. The data shall be made available to the public in accordance with state and federal law, except for personally identifiable information, which shall be deemed confidential.
(c) For the purposes of this section:
(0) “Freedman” means persons who gained freedom from slavery in the United States or their descendants.
(1) “Black Americans who are descendants of persons who were enslaved in the United States” means individuals who self-identify as Black, American Negro, American Freedman, &/or any other Aboriginal Freedman who have at least one ancestor who was enslaved in the United States.
(2) “African Americans who are descendants of persons who were enslaved in the United States” means individuals who self-identify as Black, African American, &/or African Freedman who have at least one ancestor who was enslaved in the United States.
(3) “African Blacks” means individuals who self-identify as Black and who either immigrated directly from Africa to the United States or who are descendants of such a person and who have no ancestors who were enslaved in the United States.
(4) “Caribbean Blacks” means individuals who self-identify as Black and who either left Africa for a Caribbean country before immigrating to the United States or who are descendants of such a person and who have no ancestors who were enslaved in the United States.
(5) “Other Blacks” means individuals who self-identify as Black and who either left Africa to a country not in the Caribbean before immigrating to the United States or who are descendants of such a person and who have no ancestors who were enslaved in the United States.
https://tinyurl.com/reparate-sb189 - Change
https://tinyurl.com/reparate - History
Need help…?
https://thelawdictionary.org/ - 2nd edition
9th Edition definitions…
https://tinyurl.com/negro-slavery
https://tinyurl.com/black-worker
https://thelawdictionary.org/indians/
Individual aboriginal title
Cramer v. United States (1923)
Cramer v. United States (1923) involved would-be Indian reservations (as provided for in the aforementioned unratified treaties) that had subsequently been granted to railroads by the federal government.[65] The United States District Court for the Northern District of California canceled the railroad's land patents based upon the actual use and occupation of the Indians since 1855.[66] The Ninth Circuit agreed with the District Court, but canceled the entirety of the patents at issue.[67]
The Supreme Court considered six arguments by the railroad. First, it rejected the railroad's argument that the exceptions to the grant did not specifically mention Indians; instead, the court held that all land grants are presumed to be granted subject to aboriginal title.[68]
Next, the Court considered the Act of 1851. The Court held that it was irrelevant:
The act plainly has no application. The Indians here concerned do not belong to any of the classes described therein and their claims were in no way derived from the Spanish or Mexican governments. Moreover, it does not appear that these Indians were occupying the lands in question when the act was passed.[69]
Third, the Court rejected the argument that the federal government could not bring suit on behalf of the tribe.[70] Fourth, the Court rejected the statute limiting the time in which the government could challenge the validity of its land patents, holding that did not apply to suits on behalf of Indians.[71] Fifth, the Court rejected estoppel: "Since these Indians with the implied consent of the government had acquired such rights of occupancy as entitled them to retain possession as against the defendants, no officer or agent of the government had authority to deal with the land upon any other theory."[72] Finally, however, the Court reversed the Ninth Circuit's voiding of the entire patents, holding that only the portions possessed by the Indians should be void.[73]
The holding in Cramer lay dormant for many years. Decade later, Justice Douglas dissent to the denial of certiorari where the lower court had denied a California Indian defendant the ability to defend a criminal prosecution for illegal logging on the basis of individual aboriginal title as recognized in Cramer.[74] The Court has since elaborated on the basis for its holding in Cramer:
This holding was based upon the well-understood governmental policy of encouraging the Indian to forgo his wandering habits and adopt those of civilized life; and it was said that to hold that by so doing he acquired no possessory rights to the lands occupied, to which the government would accord protection, would be contrary to the whole spirit of the traditional American policy toward these dependent wards of the nation. The fact that such right of occupancy finds no recognition in any statute or other formal governmental action is not conclusive.[75]
United States v. Dann (1989)
United States v. Dann (1989) is the most in-depth consideration of individual aboriginal title since Cramer.[76] There, although the relevant tribal aboriginal title had been extinguished, and an ordinance prohibited entry onto the federal lands in question, the Court found that the defendants could and did establish individual aboriginal title based on their use of the lands before the ordinance.[77] The Ninth Circuit (in an appeal from Nevada, not California) held:
[An individual] establish[es] aboriginal title in much the same manner that a tribe does. An individual might be able to show that his or her lineal ancestors held and occupied, as individuals, a particular tract of land, to the exclusion of all others, from time immemorial, and that this title had never been extinguished.[78]
However, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the federal policies in place at the time of Cramer had changed and thus:
In short, an Indian cannot today gain a right of occupancy simply by occupying public land, as the Indians did in Cramer. Under current law, that occupancy could not be viewed as undertaken with the implied consent of the government, as was the occupancy in Cramer. We therefore conclude that any individual occupancy rights acquired by the Danns must have had their inception prior to November 26, 1934, the date that the lands in question were withdrawn from entry by Executive Order No. 6910.[79]
Individual aboriginal title is a fact-specific and fact-intensive defense, which is difficult to raise as a criminal affirmative defense, for which the defendant has the burden of proof.[80]
…
https://www.etymonline.com/word/aboriginal
aboriginal (adj.)
1660s, "first, earliest, existing from the beginning," especially in reference to inhabitants of lands colonized by Europeans, from aborigines (see aborigine) + -al (1). The specific Australian sense is attested from 1820. The noun meaning "an original inhabitant, an autochthon" is attested from 1760. Related: Aboriginally; aboriginality (1848); aboriginalism (1859).
aborigine (n.)
"person, animal, or plant that has been in a country or region from earliest times," 1858, mistaken singular of aborigines (1540s; aboriginal is considered the correct singular in English), from Latin aborigines "the first inhabitants," especially of Latium, hence "the first ancestors of the Romans;" possibly a tribal name, or from or made to conform to the Latin phrase ab origine, which means literally "from the beginning."
This is from ab "off, away from" (see ab-) + ablative of origo "a rise, commencement, beginning, source; descent, lineage, birth," from stem of oriri "arise, rise; be born, be descended, receive life" (see origin). Extended 1789 to natives of other countries which Europeans have colonized, especially "aboriginal inhabitant of Australia." Australian slang shortening Abo attested from 1922 (n.), 1906 (adj.).
-al (1)
suffix forming adjectives from nouns or other adjectives, "of, like, related to, pertaining to," Middle English -al, -el, from French or directly from Latin -alis.
No activity yet