An Unconstitutional Poverty Program

Yesterday The Conservative Treehouse reported that Oakland, California, is beginning a program to provide $500/month with no strings attached for up to 600 families. The goal is to bridge the income gap between rich and poor. But they have forgotten a few things. First of all, the participation strictly limited to Black, Indigenous and people of color communities. That is unconstitutional. Actually, this is the beginning of reparations. Secondly, providing a monthly income to someone without requiring any work from that person does not motivate that person to get a job or progress further in the job that they have.

According to the Cornell Law website:

Civil Rights Act of 1964

The most prominent civil rights legislation since Reconstruction is the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Congress, using its power to regulate interstate commerce, enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1964 under Title 42, Chapter 21 of the United States Code. Discrimination based on “race, color, religion, or national origin” in public establishments that have a connection to interstate commerce or are supported by the state is prohibited. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000a. Public establishments include places of public accommodation (e.g., hotels, motels, and trailer parks), restaurants, gas stations, bars, taverns, and places of entertainment in general. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and subsequent legislation also declared a strong legislative policy against discrimination in public schools and colleges which aided in desegregation. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination in federally funded programs. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits employment discrimination where the employer is engaged in interstate commerce. Congress has passed numerous other laws dealing with employment discrimination

The judiciary, most notably the Supreme Court, plays a crucial role in interpreting the extent of the civil rights, as a single Supreme Court ruling can alter the recognition of a right throughout the nation. The federal courts have been crucial in mandating and supervising school desegregation programs and other programs established to rectify state or local discrimination.

Because the program is privately funded, they may be able to avoid compliance with the Civil Rights Act of 1964.