An Oklahoma judge ruled Monday that a lawsuit seeking reparations for the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre can proceed, bringing new hope for some measure of justice for three survivors of the deadly racist rampage who are now over 100 years old and were in the courtroom for the decision.
Tulsa County District Court Judge Caroline Wall ruled against a motion to dismiss the suit filed by civil rights attorney Damario Solomon-Simmons in 2020. The Tulsa-based attorney said after Wall announced her ruling that it is critical for living survivors Lessie Benningfield Randle, 107, Viola Fletcher, 107, and Hughes Van Ellis, 101.
“We want them to see justice in their lifetime,” he said, choking back tears. “I’ve seen so many survivors die in my 20-plus years working on this issue. I just don’t want to see the last three die without justice. That’s why the time is of the essence.”
The packed courtroom, which Wall noted may have been over capacity, erupted in cheers and tears after she handed down her ruling.
Previous Stories:
Armed marchers take to downtown Tulsa streets in show of strength, solidarity after cancellation of Race Massacre event
Biden’s Disgraceful Exploitation of the Tulsa Race Massacre
Solomon-Simmons sued under Oklahoma’s public nuisance law, saying the actions of the white mob that killed hundreds of Black residents and destroyed what had been the nation’s most prosperous Black business district continue to affect the city today. The lawsuit also seeks reparations for descendants of victims of the massacre.
“In public nuisance cases, it is clear either criminal acts or destruction of personal property” constitute a nuisance, said Eric Miller, a Loyola Marymount University law professor working with the plaintiffs. Miller said that racial and economic disparities resulting from the massacre continue to this day.
Chamber of Commerce attorney John Tucker said the massacre was horrible, but the nuisance is not ongoing.
“What happened in 1921 was a really bad deal, and those people did not get a fair shake … but that was 100 years ago,” Tucker said.
Oklahoma sued consumer products giant Johnson & Johnson using the state public nuisance law for its role in the deadly opioid crisis. Initially, a judge ordered the drugmaker to pay the state $465 million in damages. But the Oklahoma Supreme Court overturned the Johnson & Johnson verdict, ruling that the public nuisance law did not apply because the company had no control of the drug after it was sold to pharmacies, hospitals, and physicians’ offices and then prescribed by doctors to patients.
Miller said the state court’s ruling in the Johnson & Johnson case does not affect the lawsuit.
The massacre happened when an angry white mob descended on a 35-block area in Tulsa’s Greenwood District, killing people and looting and burning businesses and homes. Thousands of people were left homeless and living in a hastily constructed internment camp.
The city and insurance companies never compensated victims for their losses, and the massacre ultimately resulted in racial and economic disparities that still exist today, the lawsuit claims. In the years following the massacre, according to the lawsuit, city and county officials actively thwarted the community’s effort to rebuild and neglected the Greenwood and predominantly Black north Tulsa community in favor of overwhelmingly white parts of Tulsa.
Other defendants include the Tulsa County Board of County Commissioners, Tulsa Metropolitan Area Planning Commission, Tulsa County Sheriff and the Oklahoma Military Department.
The lawsuit seeks unspecified punitive damages and calls for the creation of a hospital in north Tulsa, in addition to mental health and education programs and a Tulsa Massacre Victims Compensation Fund.
The massacre received renewed attention in recent years after then-President Donald Trump selected Tulsa as the location for a 2020 campaign rally amid the ongoing racial reckoning over police brutality and racial violence. Trump moved the date of his June rally to avoid coinciding with a Juneteenth celebration in the city’s Greenwood District commemorating the end of slavery.
Associated Press writer Terry Wallace in Dallas contributed to this report.
This version corrects the spelling of Van Ellis’ first name to Hughes instead of Hugh.
Copyright 2022 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
—-
This content is published through a licensing agreement with Acquire Media using its NewsEdge technology.
“What happened in 1921 was a really bad deal, and those people did not get a fair shake … but that was 100 years ago,” Tucker said.
So, people today, who had nothing to do with it—who are not guilty of any misdeeds—should cough up money to compensate for those who are guilty, but no longer here?
You just summed up the liberal mindset perfectly.
Got it in one!
Since there appears to be no real time limit for reparations, I suggest this. To be fair Jews should be paid reparations up to the time of the
Exodus. Slaves from as far away as Ireland were used to build the Roman coliseum. Why just single out one group of people, that in itself is racist?
BECAUSE as with all things the left pushes, WHITE folk need not apply.
That’s the leftists mantra. PUNISH EVERYONE, for the sins of a few
I am of Mexican descent so should I be compensated for “our” state being taken away from my relatives over 359 years ago, lol.
Before any smart “S” remarks are made, I am a citizen who served over 25 years in the USMC. Love Corps and country.
Thank you for your service.
The way the left’s going, DON”T be surprised if some of them DO EVENTUALLY DEMAND we pay reparations to ‘mexico’ for stealing the states of arizona, texas, and cali from them…
Truth be told ,the white crowd only when after them after a group of blacks attacked the jail to get the guy out.