100% unconstitutional. Race based discrimination. You can not, Only give or take away from people based on race. A TON of "blacks" here today, their families never even here and the ones that were, were already paid free land, if they squandered it, that is on them, not anyone else. I can not stand that race baiter.
Well since Texas has removed around 1 Million illegal/ineligible voters from it's rolls she won't come near to touching Ken Paxton in the general election. In the primary who knows who the blues will run aside from her. Probably Francis.
I think, in the aggregate, black folk are doing just fine in the income tax area. Most don’t pay taxes and many actually get welfare, food stamps and tax credits.
I'm French, my ancestors were Gauls. The Romans killed 1 million and enslave another 1 million of a total population of 3 million.
Should the French ask the Italians for reparations like this bitch? It's arguably way worse than what was slavery in the US. And that's one example; there's hundreds of other tragedies committed by different groups in earth history.
She's crazy for even thinking of something like this.
She's not really crazy. Rather, it's all part of "the game" the Dems play.
She knows the composition of her voting base and knows that she needs to keep the blacks focused on their "plight", always "wanting" and looking to her/the Dems to "save them", and that if she doesn't patronize the blacks, reinforce their victimhood and promise them special recognition, special treatment, and gimmes (even if she knows those promises are unconstitutional/⁵illegal and/or there's no way she can deliver on them), she won't get the blacks' actual support/vote (or the credible illusion of their support/vote in a rigged election).
This is a fool errand. Any black person with half a brain will see through this.
Why This Proposal Would Violate the U.S. Constitution
Jasmine Crockett, a Democratic U.S. Representative from Texas who announced her candidacy for U.S. Senate in December 2025, has previously discussed the idea of temporarily exempting Black Americans from paying taxes as one potential form of reparations for historical injustices like slavery. While she framed it as an idea originating from others (e.g., celebrities) and expressed reservations— noting it might not benefit lower-income Black individuals who already pay little in federal income taxes— the proposal as stated (abolishing taxes for Black people) would be unconstitutional if enacted. Here's a step-by-step explanation grounded in the relevant constitutional provisions:
1. Core Constitutional Principle: Equal Protection Under the Law
The 14th Amendment (Section 1) states: "No State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." This clause requires that laws treat individuals equally, without arbitrary discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or other suspect classifications.
Applying this to federal actions (via the Due Process Clause of the 5th Amendment), the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that racial classifications by the government are subject to strict scrutiny— the highest level of judicial review. A law must serve a compelling government interest and be narrowly tailored to achieve it without less discriminatory alternatives.
Abolishing taxes based on race would create a racial classification: Black individuals get a benefit (tax exemption) that others do not, solely due to their race. This isn't narrowly tailored; it's a blanket exemption tied to ancestry or skin color, not individual circumstances like income or need.
2. Uniformity Requirement for Federal Taxes
Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 grants Congress the power "to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises" but specifies that "all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States."
While this clause primarily ensures geographic uniformity (e.g., no taxing one state higher than another), courts have interpreted it alongside equal protection principles to prohibit discriminatory tax schemes that favor or burden groups based on race. For example, in Head Money Cases (1878), the Supreme Court emphasized that taxes must be applied evenly without invidious distinctions.
A race-based tax exemption would violate this by creating non-uniform treatment: Non-Black taxpayers would shoulder a disproportionate share of the federal revenue burden to fund exemptions for Black taxpayers. This echoes rejected proposals like race-specific benefits, which courts have struck down (e.g., Loving v. Virginia (1967) invalidated race-based marriage laws under equal protection).
3. Precedent from Supreme Court Cases
Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (2023)*: The Court struck down race-conscious affirmative action in college admissions, ruling that such programs violate the Equal Protection Clause by using race as a "negative" factor (disadvantaging non-minorities) or "positive" one (favoring minorities). A tax exemption would similarly use race positively for Black individuals, discriminating against everyone else and lacking a time-limited, measurable endpoint.
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)*: Even race-based remedies for past discrimination must be flexible and not impose rigid quotas or stereotypes. A categorical tax abolition based on Black identity would stereotype all Black people as needing/deserving relief, ignoring class, geography, or personal history.
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)* and related cases: These established that "separate but equal" is inherently unequal; a race-based tax system would create a de facto "separate" fiscal treatment, perpetuating division rather than equality.
4. Practical and Broader Implications
Implementation Challenges: Defining "Black people" for tax purposes would require racial self-identification or government verification, inviting administrative chaos and lawsuits (e.g., under the Administrative Procedure Act for arbitrary enforcement).
Revenue and Equity Issues: Federal taxes fund public goods (roads, defense, Social Security) that benefit all. Exempting ~13% of the population (Black Americans) by race would shift ~$400–500 billion annually in income taxes onto others, exacerbating inequality and potentially requiring cuts to programs that disproportionately help low-income groups of all races.
Alternative Approaches: Reparations discussions often focus on non-racial mechanisms, like needs-based aid or historical acknowledgments (e.g., Crockett's support for a Commission on Truth, Racial Healing, and Transformation in 2025). Race-neutral policies, such as expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit for low-wage workers, could address inequities without constitutional pitfalls.
In summary, while the idea stems from debates on reparative justice, enacting it would fail strict scrutiny, violate uniformity, and deny equal protection—making it illegal under the 14th and 5th Amendments, as well as Article I. The Supreme Court would almost certainly invalidate it, as it did with similar race-based schemes. This doesn't negate the validity of addressing historical harms but underscores why solutions must be race-neutral to comply with the Constitution's anti-discrimination framework.
I sure hope she wins the democrat primary. I want to see her lose in a landslide. In other news, Texas just removed a whole bunch of illegal aliens from the voter rolls.
There was no authority in the Constitution for public charity, it would be contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Constitution and subversive to the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded.
I never owned a slave, none of my relatives ever owned slaves, why do I owe people money?
Their logic: "well, at one point, one of your reletives said hello to someone who knew a guy who was relatives with a friend of a slave owner."
Lol. No problem what so ever
Sounds like a bribe in exchange for votes. Isn't that illegal? 🤔
Send them back to Africa. There’s no taxes there!
Cheapest option...
I’ll take “what is Liberia” for $800!
How is she going to accomplish that as a Senator?
AOC 2.0.
Proven Fact: There were close to 4,000 BLACK Slave Owners, owning around 13,000 BLACK slaves.
I think she needs to prove that she is NOT a descendant of any black slave owners.
Kamala couldn't
Just another Cabal racist
Good gravy 😁😁😁
100% unconstitutional. Race based discrimination. You can not, Only give or take away from people based on race. A TON of "blacks" here today, their families never even here and the ones that were, were already paid free land, if they squandered it, that is on them, not anyone else. I can not stand that race baiter.
Well since Texas has removed around 1 Million illegal/ineligible voters from it's rolls she won't come near to touching Ken Paxton in the general election. In the primary who knows who the blues will run aside from her. Probably Francis.
I think, in the aggregate, black folk are doing just fine in the income tax area. Most don’t pay taxes and many actually get welfare, food stamps and tax credits.
Using this logic:
I'm French, my ancestors were Gauls. The Romans killed 1 million and enslave another 1 million of a total population of 3 million.
Should the French ask the Italians for reparations like this bitch? It's arguably way worse than what was slavery in the US. And that's one example; there's hundreds of other tragedies committed by different groups in earth history.
She's crazy for even thinking of something like this.
She's not really crazy. Rather, it's all part of "the game" the Dems play.
She knows the composition of her voting base and knows that she needs to keep the blacks focused on their "plight", always "wanting" and looking to her/the Dems to "save them", and that if she doesn't patronize the blacks, reinforce their victimhood and promise them special recognition, special treatment, and gimmes (even if she knows those promises are unconstitutional/⁵illegal and/or there's no way she can deliver on them), she won't get the blacks' actual support/vote (or the credible illusion of their support/vote in a rigged election).
This is a fool errand. Any black person with half a brain will see through this.
Why This Proposal Would Violate the U.S. Constitution
Jasmine Crockett, a Democratic U.S. Representative from Texas who announced her candidacy for U.S. Senate in December 2025, has previously discussed the idea of temporarily exempting Black Americans from paying taxes as one potential form of reparations for historical injustices like slavery. While she framed it as an idea originating from others (e.g., celebrities) and expressed reservations— noting it might not benefit lower-income Black individuals who already pay little in federal income taxes— the proposal as stated (abolishing taxes for Black people) would be unconstitutional if enacted. Here's a step-by-step explanation grounded in the relevant constitutional provisions:
1. Core Constitutional Principle: Equal Protection Under the Law
2. Uniformity Requirement for Federal Taxes
3. Precedent from Supreme Court Cases
4. Practical and Broader Implications
In summary, while the idea stems from debates on reparative justice, enacting it would fail strict scrutiny, violate uniformity, and deny equal protection—making it illegal under the 14th and 5th Amendments, as well as Article I. The Supreme Court would almost certainly invalidate it, as it did with similar race-based schemes. This doesn't negate the validity of addressing historical harms but underscores why solutions must be race-neutral to comply with the Constitution's anti-discrimination framework.
Guess it's time to identify as black?
I sure hope she wins the democrat primary. I want to see her lose in a landslide. In other news, Texas just removed a whole bunch of illegal aliens from the voter rolls.
Wait...
Don't you have to work first to pay taxes? Just sayin'...
There was no authority in the Constitution for public charity, it would be contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Constitution and subversive to the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded.
I'm not a biologist. What are black people? Will albinos with afro hair or jewfros get the benefit?
What about Kelly Curtis, the first black Olympian in the skeleton sled event?
https://www.npr.org/2022/02/10/1079798400/kelly-curtis-first-black-skeleton-olympian
https://www.teamusa.com/news/2022/february/09/meet-kelly-curtis-usa-skeletons-first-black-olympian
Fox showed her in uniform and wearing a helmet to avoid any questions https://www.foxnews.com/sports/kelly-curtis-the-1st-us-black-skeleton-olympian-blazes-new-trail.amp
The other 99 senators might gave somethi g to say about that.