One Note: No One Recruited By Tom Fitton Has Standing To Bring The Action In Federal Court Against The City Of Evanston.

I didn't want too much time to pass, before I mentioned this bit of detail, based on my own investigative work, and familiarity with how the reparations programs are already working here in Evanston.

I am certain that the City will say so as well, but none of the recruited "whyte ppl" could ever qualify (and none of them even applied). Why? Because to receive funds from the City, each reparations claimant must have housing (rented or owned) inside the City, to which the $25,000 per person must be applied. [The intent of the plan is/was that it improves the housing stock, and thus the tax base, for all Evanston residents. Even the immediate sons and daughters of formerly enslaved persons cannot qualify for the program, if the money to be allocated cannot be channeled into the housing stock in the city. That's the "concrete benefit to all" that will additionally doom Fitton's nonsense.]

That's right in the granting ordinance. And I've verified that not one of them still lives in Evanston -- not one of them owns or rents any residence in Evanston. They didn't just need to show that their parents lived there, or they did, from some time between 1910 and 1969. . . they needed to show that they presently had real property inside City limits -- that would be improved by receiving the reparations -- and that, none of them can. . . ever do.

So, these crisis actors / jokers have no right to complain. They have no real injury. That's what lack of standing is all about. I did see that Palatine Trustee Svenson (their local counsel) has been on a few local news shows, preaching that the US Supreme Court "no longer thinks ending race discrimination is a compelling government interest". That is a utterly false characterization of the current law.

But -- after all, she's one given to being paid to serve all the people of Palatine, at the same time she shills for whyte supremacists. Why would we trust her, in any event? We wouldn't.

So now we wait for the City's formal answer, in about ten days, in Chicago federal court. But I can guaranty that "lack of standing" will appear prominently, therein. See TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, 594 U.S. 413 (2021).

Cities have a largely wide open right to address (and I would argue, an obligation toward) remediation of prior discriminatory practices. And I personally possess originals -- of the redlined maps used by local whyte real estate brokers in the early 1960s, via a prior bequeath. So the evidence proving that people of color were not even allowed to see properties on the all-whyte blocks, in town. . . is beyond dispute. Fitton claims that program recipients weren't required to show prior discrimination, before applying. The public documents from 1910 to 1969 do that, as to any person of color living, or trying to live, in Evanston.

Fitton will be bounced out, on his oafish ear.

Onward.

नमस्ते