#RolandMartinUnfiltered - FL Crosley Green Case, CA School District Discrimination Lawsuit, SCOTUS Student Loan Cancelation

Episode Date: March 1, 2023

2.28.2023 #RolandMartinUnfiltered: FL Crosley Green Case, CA School District Discrimination Lawsuit, SCOTUS Student Loan Cancelation  The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear a case for a Florida man released from prison after 32 years for a crime he says he did not commit. We will explain what happened to Crosley Green and why his only hope is clemency from Florida Governor Ron Desantis. We will speak with Green and his attorney to explain how this happened. Four California families are suing a California School district for discrimination after their children were harassed and bullied because of their race. We will speak with their attorney to tell us what happened and how the parents are trying to hold the district accountable. The Supreme Court heard two cases challenging President Joe Biden's $400 billion student loan forgiveness program. We will summarize what happened and play audio from today's hearing with the Higher Education Policy Center for American Progress Senior Director. Today in our Marketplace segment, we will speak to the creator of Wearpack, a patent-pending detachable front handbag and backpack combined with an adjustable shoulder and waist bag, about how he created an opportunity for change. Download the Black Star Network app at http://www.blackstarnetwork.com! We're on iOS, AppleTV, Android, AndroidTV, Roku, FireTV, XBox and SamsungTV. The #BlackStarNetwork is a news reporting platform covered under Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart Podcast. It's February 28, 2023. I'm attorney Robert Petillo sitting in for Roland Martin tonight on Roland Martin Unfiltered. Roland is giving a speech at Houston, at Houston Tillerson University. Here's what's coming up on Roland Martin Unfiltered streaming live on the Black Star Network. The Supreme Court has refused to hear the case of a Florida man who's been jailed for 32 years for a murder that he says he did not commit. We'll speak with the attorney for Crosley Green about what has happened and why Governor Ron DeSantis might be the only hope for clemency.

Four Florida, California families are suing the California School District for discrimination after their children were harassed and bullied because of their race. We will speak with the attorney to tell us what happened and how the parents are trying to hold the district accountable. Also, the Supreme Court heard two cases challenging President Biden's $400 billion student loan forgiveness plan today. We will summarize what happened and we will play the audio from today's Supreme Court hearing with Jared Bass from the Center for American Progress. Also, today in our Marketplace segment, we will play the audio from today's Supreme Court hearing with Jared Bass from the Center for American Progress. Also, today in our Marketplace segment, we will speak with the creator of WearPak,

a patent-pending detachable front handbag and backpack combined with an adjustable shoulder and waist bag about how they created this opportunity for change. That's what's coming up on Roland Martin Unfiltered. It's time to bring the funk on Roland Martin Unfiltered, streaming live on the Black Star Network. He's got it. Whatever the piss, he's on it.

Whatever it is, he's got the scoop, the fact, the fine. And when it breaks, he's right on time. And it's rolling. Best belief he's knowing. Putting it down from sports to news to politics. With entertainment just for kicks

He's rollin' Yeah, yeah With Uncle Roro, yo Yeah, yeah It's Rollin' Martin Yeah, yeah Rollin' with Rollin' now Yeah, yeah

He's broke, he's fresh, he's real The best you know, he's Rollin' Martin Welcome back. Monday, the Supreme Court refused to hear the case of a Florida man who was released after being in prison for 32 years for a crime he says he did not commit. Carlsey Green was released last year, but a federal appeals panel reinstated his vacated 1990 murder conviction. His attorneys hope the United States Supreme Court would intervene. His case represents more than just his fight to stay out of prison. Now, Florida's governor, Ron DeSantis, may be his only hope to remain free. Joining us now are Krause Green and his attorney, Vincent Galeazzo, a partner at Crowley & Mourning. Gentlemen, how are you doing this afternoon?

Good evening. Nice to speak with you. And thank you so much for joining us. And I'll start with you, Vincent. Can you tell us a little bit about what the Supreme Court was or what the writ of certiorari was to the Supreme Court and why the Supreme Court declined to rule on this case? Yeah. So we presented what's called a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is not a court that has to take your case. So you essentially have to convince them to take your case because of particular legal merit. We think there are significant legal issues in Crosley's case that apply not just to Crosley, but a number of other wrongfully convicted persons all over the

country who need clarity in these legal issues. Unfortunately, we found out yesterday morning that the court declined to take his case. We don't know the reason why. The Supreme Court does not publish the reasons why. We just received notice whether they take it or not. And unfortunately, we received the notice that they declined it or not. And unfortunately, we received the notice that they declined and will not be taking his case. Now, you mentioned that you believe that his case was reflective of many other cases around the country. What was the gravamon, the basis of the red assertiori that was submitted to the court? There were a few different grounds. Most particularly was an issue actually of federalism,

which is one of the principles that underlies our Constitution, essentially the balance of powers between the states and the federal government. Crosley's case presented an issue where the state court had made findings that are now beneficial to Crosley's case. The federal court at the 11th Circuit disregarded those findings in what we view was a violation of those federalism principles. Also at issue is the Brady Doctrine, which is a longstanding Supreme Court case requiring prosecutors to disclose material exculpatory evidence. There was material exculpatory evidence in Crosley's case. It was prosecutors' notes of two first responding officers who believed that someone other than Crosley committed the crime, that Crosley was innocent. And the Supreme Court also declined on that issue as well.

And on that point, it seems that more evidence began to trickle out throughout the years as Mr. Green was in custody. I do want to talk to him briefly, but what is the recourse hereafter or hereinafter? I believe the lower court said they could either have a new trial or clemency from the governor. What are the next steps possible? So in terms of the legal case that Crosley and we have presented thus far, that case has now ended at the Supreme Court. If there is newly discovered evidence, there is the possibility of a new case. But assuming not, there's two avenues available. There might be others, but two avenues that are the most obvious. One is the possibility of parole. Crosley is

eligible and could be potentially placed on parole through the parole board in Florida. And there's also clemency through the governor of the state of Florida, currently Ron DeSantis, which takes many forms, anywhere from a full pardon to a limited release. And we will be seeking all potential avenues to both keep Crosley out of prison and if he is forced to return to get him out at a later date. Absolutely. And, Mr. Grant, I wanted to talk to you. How has the Supreme Court, deciding not to hear this case, how has it affected you?

I know these last few years have been an absolute roller coaster between being released, being put on house arrest, having to go before the Supreme Court. What impact has this had on you? Well, truthfully speaking, I don't know too much about the law and stuff like that. I don't too much know about the way they make decisions there. But I really thought that the case I have and the things that we filed it for is something that should be looked at because it got to do with due process. process like you should get through process, you're going to see many, many more of these types of cases get thrown to the side in which they need to be heard. They need to be seen. They need to know whether or not the justice of the United States Department is being correctly posed in a situation like mine.

And I think one of the things that stuck out with me researching your case was that they accused you of stealing a car that was a stick shift, and you did not know how to drive a stick shift. And the officers admitted to this at the time, but that information was never transmitted to your trial attorney. That would have been exculpatory in many ways. What will your message be to Governor DeSantis, who now has the him giving me clemency because of the two years I've been out. Well, I don't say just the two years I've been out. For the last 30 years, plus the two years I've been out, I've been showing great pose of a citizen, a United States citizen, someone that can be trusted, someone that has a family, someone that wants to be with his family.

I go to work every day. I do all my duties as I'm supposed to do. There's no flaw, nowhere from right now today back to 33 years ago, if they can go back and find anything that would point to me not being able to deal with society, to live in society, you know, then there's a problem. But a man like myself, I've humbled myself in making myself better, forgiving. I don't have no anger. I don't have no hate. And I never have it. Right now, the only thing I do is believe.

I truly believe that no matter what, one day I'll be set free. And I have the faith to know that one day, even though my case didn't go directly to the United States Supreme Court to be heard, there are going to be other cases come along. And when it does come along, I truly want, even though they didn't decide on my case in this kind of petition that was sent to them, situation, they would take a better look at the way that the states, some states, not all states, and it could be all states, but mainly counties in which are allowed to do things and get away with, you know, and it's not fair. Absolutely. We'll make sure we keep an eye on the case, and there's ways that people can follow you on social media, write letters to the governor, any ways that people can assist in this case.

Attorney Vincent, how people want to assist, how can they reach out, how can they get in contact, how can they follow the case? Yeah, the best way to follow the case is there's a Facebook page called Justice for Crosley Green. There will be information posted there whenever we get notification from the state of anything happening. We'll also be posting information about how those in the public can help. But there will be things to be done, and we do appreciate everyone's continued support, including yours. Thank you very much. Thank you so much. Carlton Green, Attorney Vincent Galluzzo, keep us updated. We really look forward to hopefully hearing good news about you being granted clemency after spending so much of your life

in custody for a crime you say you have not committed. We'll be back after the break. You're watching Rolling Martyr Unfiltered, streaming live on the Black Star Network. On the next Get Wealthy with me, Deborah Owens, America's Wealth Coach. The wealth gap has literally not changed in over 50 years, according to the Federal Reserve.

On the next Get Wealthy, I'm excited to chat with Jim Castleberry, CEO of Known Holdings. They have created a platform, an ecosystem, to bring resources to Blacks and people of color so they can scale their business. Even though we've had several examples of African-Americans and other people of color being able to be successful, we still aren't seeing the mass level of us being lifted up. That's right here on Get Wealthy

only on Blackstar Network. Most people think that these television shows that tell stories about who we are as black men and then they paint these monolithic portraits of us. They think

that they're being painted by white people. And I gotta tell you, there are a whole bunch of black folk that are the creators, the head writers, the directors of all of these shows and that are still painting us as monoliths. The people don't really wanna have this conversation. No, they don't really want to have this conversation. No, they don't. Hi, I'm Vivian Green.

Hey, everybody. This is your man, Fred Hammond, and you're watching Roland Martin, my man, Unfiltered. Welcome back to Roland Martin Unfiltered, streaming live on the Black Star Network. Also, make sure if you're watching on YouTube, watching on Facebook, that you like the video, you comment on the video, you share the video.

We're trying to get these social media numbers up so we have something to show Roland when we get back. But joining us now, we're going to bring the panel into this conversation. We're joined by Dr. Mustafa Santiago Ali, former senior advisor for environmental justice of the EPA, and also Dr. Nyambi Carter, associate professor at the University of Maryland School of Public Policy work. I want to start with you, Dr. Carter. What does it say about our Supreme Court, where a case such as this, where a man has been incarcerated for 32 years, where exculpatory evidence comes to light,

where there's a great chance of actually bringing justice in the case, but because we have this 6-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court, they don't so much as even hear the case, even rule on it. Well, I mean, I think this is what the attorney was talking about, right? The Supreme Court gets to choose their cases. And in this moment, they're saying they choose not to hear a case about justice. I mean, this man was denied many of his constitutional rights under the law. This is what the Supreme Court is there to do, which is to be the court of last resort and adjudicate this matter.

And the fact that they won't even hear the case tells us that they're not interested in this. They are interested, however, in engineering social policy around things like abortion and other things, but they're not there to do the job that I think most of us expect out of a Supreme Court at this particular moment. And Mustafa, on this point, you know, recent polling has shown that Americans have little to no faith in institutions. They don't have any faith in the media. They don't have any faith in the Congress.

They're losing faith in the presidency and the government. The last place that had some shred of belief and integrity in it was the Supreme Court. What does a decision like this do to the last bits of public support for the Supreme Court? I think it continues to erode, you know, the support that's necessary. We have to have trust in our court systems. In many instances, they're our last resort for justice. So when we see these types of situations playing out, then it moves us further and further and further away from justice inside of our country. And, you know, it's kind of interesting also because the Georgia Innocence Project actually did research on the amount of people who are, you know, who are falsely

convicted. There's some numbers between five and 10 percent of folks who are currently incarcerated are wrongfully incarcerated and are actually innocent. So the Supreme Court should be taking that into consideration and making sure they're doing their due diligence to take another look at this case and to make sure there weren't any mistakes that were done in the past. We know that there are unfortunately lies that are often told by law enforcement and other false statements. So we just know that if you want to have our trust,

then you've got to make sure that you are fully looking at these cases in a very honest and open way. I think a lot of people, because the only time they interact with our criminal justice system in large part is on television, where you see courtroom dramas, and they think that's the way that the court system actually operates.

They think that you're actually going after truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and you're convicting people beyond a reasonable doubt. When in reality, for anybody who's tried cases or been through a major criminal trial, you will know there are so many areas where errors can occur, so many places where things can slip through the crack, so many places where it just comes down to not dispositive proof one way or the other, but just inferences, circumstantial evidence that results in a conviction, personal biases by the jury, judges who allow certain evidence in and certain evidence not in. Dr. Carter, what can we do to start restoring some faith in the criminal

justice system as we have it when we have cases like Crosley Green, or someone can end up in jail for 32 years for a crime they didn't commit. And then when you get to the court of last resort, still not being, not seeing justice, even the highest levels of our government. Well, unfortunately, there are so many Crosley Greens. And I think, you know, when we talk about restoring confidence, I mean, unfortunately, this is probably the court we're going to have for a very long time. Donald Trump put several justices on that court who are pretty young by Supreme Court standards. And as we're looking down the pike, I mean, it doesn't seem, at least at the Supreme Court level, anything is going to change. But I think some of the things that you said just now makes it clear that this is an institution that we have to pay attention to.

So if you are in a local community where you can elect DAs and elect judges, do that, right? If you are in a place and you've been asked to serve on a jury, do that. Because there are so many places where there are not individuals there to stand in the gap, quite frankly. Because all that stands between most of us are really ill-informed people and some attorneys. And they're making decisions about who gets on juries, the kinds of questions they're asking. The instructions for jury are also another place where we know these biases can show up and people can have their injustice meted out upon them. So I think we just have to be more engaged. And I think many of us assumed, or at least felt like we could let the courts handle things

and that the rights will be, the wrongs will be righted at that level. But usually by the time we get to court, it's too late because the police officers have already locked you up. The DAs have already decided to charge you. And so what's showing up in that room are all of these other choices. And it's either the jurors and or the judges that are going to be making same biased decisions that these other law enforcement officials have made. And Mustafa, just kind of in a cruel twist of fate, this all now comes down

to Governor Ron DeSantis, who's running on his anti-woke agenda, strong law and order police supporting agenda, and also in the run-up to an election year where he will be running for president on a platform like that. This brings up the 1988 campaign comes to mind, many other smears that happened to politicians when they actually try to do the right thing on criminal justice reform, particularly in election years. What do you think has to happen to sway and appeal to the better angels of Ron DeSantis to do the right thing on a case of this nature? Well, if I knew the answer to that, I'd be a wealthy man. But I do know that

Ron DeSantis has been very focused on demonizing and dehumanizing folks inside of our communities, erasure of our communities. And by taking this man's life, that would be another form of erasure. I think that if enough folks reach out and let him know that their vote is tied to these types of actions that he should be doing, you know, to support this gentleman and make sure that his life is protected and that hopefully he is free, that may sway him, because he is definitely tied to the political process. And if he feels that it will help him in some form or fashion, he's much more likely to take a closer look and hopefully do the right thing.

So let's stay optimistic that if we put pressure, if we raise our voices, send in those text messages, those emails, that we will keep a spotlight on the injustice that's happening here and that Ron DeSantis will do the right thing. Yeah, you know, it's just hard. We have to depend on that sentence existing. Ron DeSantis doing the right thing, which we have not seen going in the previous several years of his administration. Dr. Carter, what can we do legislatively to stop things like this from happening? Because we see the good work the Innocence Project has been doing. We see many volunteer organizations working with people who've been in custody 20, 30, 40 years trying to get them new trials and trying to get them released.

But it seems that this is very retroactive. They don't figure out how to get me out after I've been locked up for 30 years, figure out how to stop me from getting locked up in the first place. What types of reforms can be put in place that will help us to ameliorate many of these issues in the criminal justice system going forward, not just looking backwards to the things that have happened previously. Yeah, I think you're right. I mean, a lot of this is retrospective. So one of the things I think we can think about is why do we need to enforce nuisance laws in the first place, right? I mean, sure, there might be safety issues that might be out there, but sometimes people get caught up on very minor kinds of charges, right? And if we could take that away, especially in our communities,

which are over surveilled and over police, I think that would go a long way to keeping people out of jail. I also think we need to be, I mean, and I don't know how we manage this legislatively necessarily, but we also, I think, have to give, I think, a second look to district attorneys

and others who are making claims, police officers for sure, because we know police officers lie in their accounts and in their reports. And in many cases, we've seen over and over again where police officers have maybe misused an informant or someone to say that someone did something. And there's all this kind of statements that are either contradictory and other kinds of things. But yet we're taking these very suspect statements as law. The other thing I think we also need to do is make sure the states have skin in the game and make sure that there are compensation packages awarded to people who are coming out of prison, particularly those who've been falsely accused. And make that not just something that happens on an ad hoc basis if someone brings a civil suit, but make that the law that people have to be compensated for the time they spent in prison. Because it's not just the people who are there. It's their family members. Right.

It's the phone calls. It's all the things that happen to destabilize and disrupt families when loved ones are locked up. And Mustafa, that kind of brings up another point, piggybacking off of that. There are currently no penalties for officers if you are caught lying on a police report. There are no penalties, criminal at least, if it's found that 30 years down the line that you falsified evidence or that you did not turn in a report that would have exonerated an individual. What can we do to hold law enforcement accountable, particularly when someone has already given them 30 years of their life based on a lie that was either told or an omission that was made by an officer? The first thing we do is we make sure that inside the law that there's real strong enforcement accountability actions,

that if we find that someone in law enforcement has lied, then they're treated the exact same way if you or I lied as a part of an investigation or as a part of an action that's going on. So we just got to make sure that there's real fairness and balance in the law. And that means that law enforcement is held to the same level that each and every one of us are. If we're not going to do that, then folks are going to continue to utilize the behaviors that they have that have been very detrimental and in many instances devastating to families inside of our communities. And just last question, Dr. Carter, what message would you give to individuals who are currently incarcerated? Because I get letters from incarcerated individuals all the time,

just from watching this show, that are seeking help. When it comes to what they can do to hold out hope that maybe someday someone like the Innocence Project or other organizations will come in and will help them find justice in their case. What hope can we give them to let them know that the system is not completely broken, but there are people on the outside working for them to help bring them home? I think we have to remind folks who are there that this is a marathon and not a sprint. And I know, you know, it's easy to get discouraged because you're sending emails to people and you're sending, you know, case files and all these kinds of things at great personal expense and emotional expense. But this is a marathon. I mean, a lot of these cases take a long time to be adjudicated and depend on a lot of actors coming together. And many of the

organizations that are doing this really important work are underfunded, understaffed, and just don't have the resources to take on every single case. So I would also encourage, right, to know as much as you can about your own case and get as much information as you can. So when you do get in touch with those individuals and they are interested, that they actually can start to maybe disentangle some of the threads here. But this is, it's an all hands on deck approach. It's a long-term process. And if you do have loved ones or community on the outside that can assist in advocating for you to please rely on those folks and don't try to take it all on yourself. Absolutely. And Mustafa, last question for you. Every election cycle, you know, we hear kind of the naysayers in the black community say don't vote because they're not talking about reparations. Don't vote because they're not talking about gentrification. Don't vote because they're not talking about reparations, don't vote because they're not talking about gentrification,

don't vote because they're not talking about XYZ. What can we do to help people understand that the Supreme Court is reason enough to vote? Give me about 30 seconds on that. I mean, our vote is tied to everything that happens inside of our communities, inside of our lives. And if we want to make sure that freedom becomes a reality, part of that freedom is making sure that we to make sure that freedom becomes a reality, part of that freedom is making sure that we're making sure that folks are not getting locked up and then

getting caught in these systems. So the power exists inside of our vote to change some of those dynamics. Yeah, the difference between a man spending 30 years in prison and being out was the 2016 election. You have a different Supreme Court. You probably have a different outcome in this hearing. You probably have a different outcome in this hearing. You probably have a different future trajectory for Mr. Green going forward. We're going to go to a break. You're watching Roland Martin Unfiltered, streaming live on the Black Star Network. Next on The Black Table with me, Greg Carr.

We featured the brand new work of Professor Angie Porter, which, simply put, is a revolutionary reframing of the African experience in this country. It's the one legal article everyone, and I mean everyone, should read. Professor Porter and Dr. Valetia Watkins, our legal roundtable team, join us to explore the paper that I guarantee is going to prompt

a major aha moment in our culture. You crystallize it by saying, who are we to other people? Who are African people to others? Governance is our thing. Who are we to each other? The structures we create for ourselves, how we order the universe as African people.

That's next on The Black Table, here on The Black Star Network. Hatred on the streets, a horrific scene, a white nationalist rally that descended into deadly violence. On that soil, you will not be free. White people are losing their damn minds. There's an angry pro-Trump mob storm to the U.S. Capitol. We're about to see the rise of what I call white minority resistance.

We have seen white folks in this country who simply cannot tolerate black folks voting. I think what we're seeing is the inevitable result of violent denial. This is part of American history. Every time that people of color have made progress, whether real or symbolic, there has been what Carol Anderson at Emory University calls white rage as a backlash. This is the wrath of the Proud Boys and the Boogaloo Boys. America, there's going to be more of this. There's all the Proud Boys guys. This country is getting increasingly racist

in its behaviors and its attitudes because of the fear of white people. The fear that they're taking our jobs, they're taking our resources, they're taking our women. This is white fear. On the next Get Wealthy with me, Deborah Owens, America's Wealth Coach. The wealth gap has literally not changed in over 50 years, according to the Federal Reserve. On the next Get Wealthy, I'm excited to chat with Jim Castleberry, CEO of Known Holdings.

They have created a platform, an ecosystem, to bring resources to Blacks and people of color so they can scale their business. Even though we've had several examples of African Americans and other people of color being able to be successful, we still aren't seeing the mass level of us being lifted up. That's right here on Get Wealthy, only on Black Star Network. When you talk about blackness and what happens in black culture.

We're about covering these things that matter to us, speaking to our issues and concerns. This is a genuine people powered movement. A lot of stuff that we're not getting, you get it and you spread the word. We wish to plead our own cause to long have others spoken for us. We cannot tell our own story if we can't pay for it. This is about covering us. Invest in black-owned media. Your dollars matter.

We don't have to keep asking them to cover our stuff. So please support us in what we do, folks. We want to hit 2,000 people, $50 this month, raise $100,000. We're behind $100,000, so we want to hit that. Your money makes this possible. Checks and money orders go to P.O. Box 57196,

Washington, D.C., 20037-0196. The Cash App is Dollar Sign RM Unfiltered. PayPal is R. Martin Unfiltered. Venmo is RM Unfiltered. Zelle is Roland at RolandSMartin.com.

Most people think that these television shows that tell stories about who we are as black men and then they paint these monolithic portraits of us. They think that they're being painted by white people. And I got to tell you, there are a whole bunch of black folk. Right. That are the creators, the head writers, the directors of all of these shows and that are still painting us as monoliths. The people don't really want to have this conversation.

No, they don't. We're all impacted by the culture, whether we know it or not. From politics to music and entertainment, it's a huge part of our lives. And we're going to talk about it every day right here on The Culture with me, Faraji Muhammad, only on the Black Star Network. On a next A Balanced Life with me, Dr. Jackie, a relationship that we have to have. We're often afraid of it and don't like to talk about it. That's right. We're talking about our relationship with money. And here's the thing. Our relationship with money oftentimes determines whether we have it or not. The truth is you cannot change what you will not acknowledge. Balancing your relationship with your pocketbook.

That's next on A Balanced Life with me, Dr. Jackie, here at Blackstar Network. Blackstar Network is here. Hold no punches! I'm real revolutionary right now. Black power! We support this man, Black Media. He makes sure that our stories are told. Thank you for being the voice of Black America, Roller.

Be Black, I love y'all. All momentum we have now, we have to keep this going. The video looks phenomenal. See, there's a difference between Black Star Network and Black-owned media and something like CNN. You can't be Black-owned media and be scary. It's time to be smart. Bring your eyeballs home.

You dig? We featured the brand new work of Professor Angie Porter, which, simply put, is a revolutionary reframing of the African experience in this country. It's the one legal article everyone, and I mean everyone, should read. Professor Porter and Dr. Vletia Watkins, our legal round table team, join us to explore the paper that I guarantee

is going to prompt a major aha moment in our culture. You crystallize it by saying, who are we to other people? Who are African people to others? Governance is our thing. Who are we to each other? The structures we create for ourselves, how we order the universe as African people.

That's next on The Black Table, here on The Black Star Network. Hi, my name is LaToya Luckett. Joe, it's your man Deon Cole from Black-ish, and you're watching... Roland Martin, Unfiltered. Stay woke. In our next story, the Justice Department

have reached another multimillion-dollar agreement to resolve allegations of lending discrimination against Park National Bank. Headquartered in Newark, Ohio, Park National was accused of engaging in a pattern and practice of lending discrimination by redlining in the Columbus area from 2015 to 2021. The bank also failed to provide mortgage lending services by redlining majority Black and Hispanic neighborhoods. As part of the agreement, the Justice Department secured $9 million from Park National to address and resolve the allegations. Here's some details of the settlement. The bank will invest $7.75 million in a loan subsidy fund to increase access to credit for home mortgages, improvements and

refinance loans, home equity loans, and lines of credit in majority Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in the Columbus area. Also, $750,000 will go to outreach, advertising, consumer financial education, and credit counseling initiatives. $500,000 will be used to develop community partnerships and provide services to residents of majority Black and Hispanic areas to expand access to residential mortgage credit. The bank agreed to open one new branch and one new branch loan production office in majority Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in the Columbus area with a minimum of four mortgage lenders, at least one in a Spanish-speaking setup. They must maintain a full-time director of community home lending and development position, which oversees lending in majority Black and Hispanic areas. The bank will also conduct a

community credit needs assessment. The research-based market study will help identify the needs of the financial services of the Columbus majority Black and Hispanic areas. I want to go to our panel on this. So, Mustafa, what does it say that we still are having these issues of redlining and banking all the way in 2023? Many people think of redlining as an issue of the Jim Crow South of the 1950s and 1960s. What does it say that we're still fighting these issues here in 2023? Well, it says that systemic racism in the banking industry is still real and is still apparent and living, you know, in the processes that are going on. You know, the question becomes, you know, what are the senior leaders in these banks doing? Because, you know, folks follow the leadership of the folks who are, you know, above them.

So the question is, how many of them are now gone? You know, and the other question is, how many of the managers of those local branches are gone? Because if you continue to allow these types of individuals to stay in these positions, then we're going to continue to have these types of problems. Yes, it is systemic, but it is also, you it also comes down to the local level, if you will. So there's a bunch of changes that have to happen. We've got to have even harder and more severe penalties for these types of things. And if we're not willing to do that, we're going to continue to see these behaviors play out time and time again. And Dr. Carter, on that point,

this same bank, Park National, just last month agreed to pay $31 million for doing the same thing in Los Angeles, California. So it's not just an isolated issue geographically. It's not an isolated issue. This rarely happens. This appears to be a systemic issue. And we talked to some of these Republicans about the issue of systemic racism, they will talk you blue in the face, claiming that you're making it all up. What can we do to start eradicating some of these issues instead of handling them piece by piece? Because there's one thing to go after this bank for what they did in L.A. It's another thing to go after them for what they did in Ohio. It's something completely different to put in place federal legislation that will stop this from happening going forward. Well, I mean, and think about it. I mean, this isn't just the only

bank that's ever been caught out here. I mean, there have been plenty of them. And when we look at the housing industry as a whole, right, from the lenders all the way down to the people who are doing appraisals, we have a long way to go for Black people to receive any kind of equity in this system. And we think about it, by the time we get here, the damage has already been done. So, this is to your earlier point about looking proactively, rather than simply responding to these kinds of slights. And I think, look, I mean, the truth is, if legislation was all it took, these wouldn't

be issues. I mean, we have had federal legislation around discriminatory housing and housing practices for a really long time. But I think we often assume that because this legislation is already there, we don't have to do anything more than that. And unfortunately, what we're also seeing is that even with the algorithms that banks and others are using to determine who is creditworthy, right, and what kinds of mortgages that people apply for, those things are also repeating the same kind of racist things back, even though this computer is supposed to make this process unbiased and open. So I think we have to do really a real sort of full-scale excavation of the society that we live in, because what we see in banking and

with mortgage lending is what we saw in 2009, right, what we saw 50 years ago. And this is in the moment where we have legislation that suggests that you cannot be treated unfairly in this process. And quite frankly, I don't know if there's a legislative response if we don't have people in these positions who actually want to put forth a good faith effort to treat Black and Brown people equitably in the housing market. You know, it's interesting. John Oliver did a thing this weekend on those algorithms that are used to AI prompts that are used to make some of these determinations. And guess what? If you put racist information in, you get racist results out. So the algorithm is getting the same input, saying that white people are more creditworthy,

crime is lower in white communities, you're getting better home resale values in white communities. If you put that all into an algorithm, then it's going to spit out the same sorts of lending practices that went in there. You're now programming computers for racism going forward into the 21st century. We're going to come back after the break. You're watching Rolling Murder Unfiltered streaming live on the Black Star Network. Folks, Black Star Network is here.

Hold no punches. I'm real revolutionary right now. Black power. We support this man, Black Media. He makes sure that our stories are told. I thank you for being the voice of Black America, Roller. Big Black, I love y'all. All momentum we have now, we have to keep this going.

The video looks phenomenal. See, there's a difference between Black Star Network and Black-owned media and something like CNN. You can't be Black-owned media and be scared. It's time to be smart. Bring your eyeballs home. You dig? Most people think that these television shows that tell stories about who we are as black men,

and then they paint these monolithic portraits of us. They think that they're being painted by white people. and then they paint these monolithic portraits of us. They think that they're being painted by white people. And I gotta tell you, there are a whole bunch of black folk that are the creators, the head writers, the directors of all of these shows and that are still painting us as monoliths. The people don't really wanna have this conversation.

No, they don't. Hi, I'm Eric Nolan. I'm Shantae Moore. Hi, my name is Latoya Luckett, and you're watching Roland Martin Unfiltered. Four California families who say their children have been routinely harassed and bullied on account of their race are now seeking damages against the school district.

Parents of students attending Peppertree Elementary School in Upland, California, claim the school and the school district failed to end bullying and racial harassment of their children that had been reported numerous times. One student received a handmade card that read, to my favorite cotton picker, for Black History Month. Another student was given a golden N-word pass. Joining me now are Rome and Mylanta Douglas, parents of London and Rome Jr. and their attorney, James Bryant, a partner at the Cochran Firm in California.

Thank all of you so much for joining us. I want to start with you, Mr. Douglas, and we'll bring in Attorney Bryant when we get a chance. Can you talk a little bit about the harassment your children have experienced thus far at this school? You know, it's been the hardest thing, especially for my son. My son is big. I'm big. He takes after me. But the hardest thing has been him being called a monkey and having other kids come up behind him making monkey sounds. That's probably been the most difficult, the monkey sounds, he said, and having to contain himself and hold himself back because he knows if he does anything, he's going to be in trouble. Absolutely. And Ms. Douglas, can you talk a little bit about the mental toll that has taken on the children thus far?

Because it's one thing to experience bullying in school. I think most people experience some form of bullying in school. But when you take it to this racist and racial level, it's a whole different ballgame when it comes to the trauma it inflicts on children. Yeah, I think it varies. It goes back and forth between the anger for some of them, the sadness. And I think what hurts them the most is, yes, it was their peers that were calling them, you know, racial, bullying them in a racial way. But I think it also hurts that the teachers, it didn't seem like the teachers to a certain degree did anything to stop it. And then it went on for kind of so long. And that was what's really kind of been difficult for them.

And it really makes them hesitant to feel safe going back to school. And Mr. Douglas, what types of complaints were made? Because from everything I've read, you went through every possible corridor to try to get this taken care of before going to the route of litigation. What types of things did you attempt to try to resolve these problems first?

So we've reached out to the teachers. We've had meetings with teachers because this started last year when Rome was called a monkey in class. We reached out to the teacher. We've set up meetings with the principal, with the assistant principal. We've gone down to the school board. We've met with the school board officials, the superintendent. We've been to her office. My wife has sent emails. Am I leaving anything out? No, that's it. And every time we always ask for training. We set out to, we want to try to help change the culture and to help make sure that this doesn't happen to other students. But we weren't successful because none of the trainings or anything were ever implemented.

One of the most discouraging things for me as a father, my mother is a teacher. She's been in education for 40 years. So is my sister. She's a teacher and a dean. And we always lean on them for their expert advice. But I've had them write letters. But when we were told that there was going to be some training, that made me as a father feel good. I felt, OK, look, no one's perfect. And with training, things can get better. And we were promised that there was going to be these in-services that were going to be used for sensitivity training. And the most disheartening thing for me is when I found out that not a single one, not a single one, was used for any sort of training. So what were they used for, since they weren't using for actual training to solve this problem?

Was it just kind of a perfunctory thing, or what were they actually doing during these trainings? So I wasn't privy to the actual trainings. I was told that for sure they weren't for this, but I wasn't told exactly what they were for. Apparently the principal gets out of the in-services have the principal has three in services that she gets the control the narrative of what it is with meaning what the teachers learn what they teach or what training they bring in there's three of them that she gets to control the narrative of and we were told that those three were going to be sensitivity training and we were told specifically by a teacher, specifically,

that there has not been one single training on sensitivity, not one. I want to bring Attorney Bryant in on this conversation. So, Attorney Bryant, it sounds like the parents went through every plausible step they could to try to get remedies in this case. What are the legal claims being made against the district in this case? Yes. So one of the most important things, and I think what was critical for the parents, was to put the district on notice that there were these issues. So as far as the legal claims are concerned, they are clearly in violation of Education Code 201 in California, amongst several others. But the most important one is Education

Code 201, which has a very strict rule against allowing or facilitating children being harassed based upon race, sexual orientation, gender, et cetera. These children have really gone through some of the worst possible things that any child could go through. And the school is responsible, and this is California law, the school is responsible for the welfare safety of these children from the time they leave to go to school until the time they get home. So there are numerous constitutional violations that have occurred. Clearly, the school did not adhere to their duty to protect these children. And what's worse is that once they were put on notice, and this is by several families,

this isn't just by the Douglases, but several families had informed the school of the racial harassment, the attacks that the children were facing, and nobody did anything to remedy the situation. They didn't provide a safe space for these children. And as a matter of fact, there were people at the school, from my understanding, that essentially condoned these actions and permitted discontinued harassment. And that's the problem.

And with the litigation, are you seeking to remedy the specific teachers who failed to act, the administration who failed to act? Are you trying to change district policy as a whole going forward? It is a number of things that we're looking to accomplish. I think first and foremost, it's to provide a safe space for these children. So that's changing district policy immediately. Remedies such as immediate enforcement of sensitivity training around race, around gender, around sexual orientation, you know, ensuring that the teachers and administrators who were permitting or who helped really allow this to happen received very tough consequences, which is, as far as I'm

concerned, termination. I'm not sure if you heard, but there was at least one teacher and an assistant principal whose children were some of the main culprits involved in these racial attacks. And children aren't born racist. They are trained to hate. And so, therefore, the training came somewhere, and as far as I'm concerned, it came from home. In addition, we're trying to have a district-wide policy change where they are now implementing systems to avoid any further racial harassment and to teach their children because the school has a duty to do that. And third, we're talking about monetary compensation for these children. You know,

I'm not sure, and I'm assuming, you know, like myself, you know what the feeling is in the hurt that racism causes when you hear or when you're called a racial epithet and you're called out for your race over a period of time. There's a lot of hurt in these children. And it's going to take years and years and years to assist and help them through therapy and through whatever other services that they need in order to be made whole. So we're also looking at monetary compensation from the school district as well. But what I'd also like to point out is, I'm hoping that the state of California, as well as the other states across this country,

start implementing policy changes. And I do plan on being and continuing to be an advocate for districts across the country to ensure that children are safe, especially given what happened in Kentucky and in Utah with the two young Black children committing suicide recently because of racial harassment that went unchecked. Going back to Mr. and Mrs. Douglas, some people will say, well, why didn't you just transfer your kids to a different school? Why have them stay in this school to experience this sort of harassment? What would be your response to people asking those sorts of

questions? My response is this. The Douglas's moved to Upland, California to go to Peppertree Elementary. Specifically, they uprooted their lives to go to this school. And this idea that a family who moved right across the street is just going to uproot themselves, sell their home and try to find a new school district. That's not right. Right. That's not right. Why can't this why can't these children still get a great education in the system itself? Change. Why? Why do the parents have to change? They did literally every single thing they could to ensure that their children had the best opportunity in life. And despite their complaints, the school district didn't do anything. So, you know, my point is, if people, you know, say, well, why didn't they just move?

It's not that easy to move a family of six where you purchased a home across the street from a school that you thought was going to be the best opportunity for them. It's just not that easy. And you mentioned other families were, or had similar complaints. Have you had other families seeking to join this litigation? Are you seeking class certification on this? What is the status of the other families who may have similar claims? Yeah, this wouldn't be a class case. Each individual kid would have their own particular claim. But yes, we have several families. We have obviously the Douglas family. We have the Jackson family. We have a couple other families that are involved. We have the Reynoso family. And we have another family that's involved with

this. So there's already four families who are going to be moving forward with their claims, and we recently had a press conference yesterday with all four of those families. So going back to Mr. and Mrs. Douglas, what would be your message to families across the country whose kids may be going through similar issues when it comes to keeping this fight up and making sure that you go through every avenue available to hold people accountable? I would say as a father, you have to advocate for your kids. You have to be there. Through this process, I will say it's been alarming.

We've had so many families reach out to us. I want to say almost every family of color just about at the school has reached out to us with similar issues. It's not just our family. There's other kids. I've had a mother email me recently to tell me that her daughter was called a slave and it was swept under the rug. And it's supposed to be the zero tolerance policy. So parents, we have to advocate. I know that, you know, we expect our kids to be safe in school because that's the way it's designed and supposed to be. But we have to pop in. We have to show a presence because if not, you never know when your child is going to be potentially taken advantage of or mistreated. I hate to say that, but that is what's happening.

Well, I want all of you to make sure you keep us updated on this case going forward and anything that the community can do to reach out and provide support, please let us know. Attorney Bryant, where can people follow up and find more information out on this case? So you can follow up through either a lot of the local news has been playing. Apparently it's made a lot of national news. But if you go to our Cochran firm page on Facebook or if you go to our Cochran firmirm page on Facebook or if you go to our Cochran Firm page on Instagram, you can reach and find out more information there. Thank you so much, Attorney Bryan, for everything that you're doing. Mr. and Mrs. Douglas, we definitely stand to support you with all that you've gone through. I know other families are drawing inspiration for everything in the fight that you're putting up in defense of your children.

Thank all of you so much for joining us this evening. We're going to go to a break. You're watching Roland Martin Unfiltered streaming live on the Black Star Network. Hatred on the streets, a horrific scene, a white nationalist rally that descended into deadly violence. You will not. White people are losing their damn lives. There's an angry pro-Trump mob storm to the U.S. Capitol. We're about to see the rise of what I call white minority resistance.

We have seen white folks in this country who simply cannot tolerate black folks voting. I think what we're seeing is the inevitable result of violent denial. This is part of American history. Every time that people of color have made progress, whether real or symbolic, there has been what Carol Anderson at Emory University calls white rage as a backlash. This is the wrath of the Proud Boys and the Boogaloo Boys. America, there's going to be more of this. There's all the Proud Boys guys. This country is getting increasingly racist in its behaviors and its attitudes

because of the fear of white people. The fear that they're taking our jobs, they're taking our resources, they're taking our women. This is white fear. We're all impacted by the culture, whether we know it or not. From politics to music and entertainment, it's a huge part of our lives. And we're going to talk about it every day right here on The Culture with me, Faraji Muhammad, only on the Black Star Network. Hey, what's up everybody?

It's Godfrey, the funniest dude on the planet. And you're watching... Roland Martin Unfiltered. And... The Supreme Court has heard arguments in two cases challenging President Obama's 400, or President Biden, rather, $400 billion student loan forgiveness program. Justice has

heard Biden versus Nebraska first, a case involving six states, Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, and South Carolina, who challenged President Biden's student loan debt relief program. The Nebraska solicitor, James Campbell, solicitor general, argued that Missouri's Higher Education Loan Authority, or MOHELA, is the nation's largest loan servicer. Solicitor General Elizabeth Perlow argued that the Education Secretary could provide relief under the HEROES Act, a 2003 law that ensured federal student loan borrowers

would not be economically devastated during a national emergency. The justices later heard arguments for the Department of Education v. Brown involving two borrowers, Myra Brown and Alexander Taylor, who did not meet eligibility requirements to sign up for the program and are challenging it because they say it is unfair. The Biden administration was planned with council federal student loan debt for more than 40 million Americans. Joining us now is Jared Bass, the senior director of higher education and policy at the Center for American Progress. Mr. Bass, how are you doing this evening? I'm doing well. How are you? I'm doing great. Also, I'm a CAPA alumni intern there back in 2007, probably.

But I want to talk a little bit about these two cases. Can you explain to the audience what exactly these two cases are challenging against the administration's program on student loan relief? Sure. So the first case is Biden v. Nebraska, which you mentioned. So in that case, a group of about six states, including Nebraska, are challenging President Biden's debt relief action, saying that, one, it exceeded the president's authority, that it was actually not foreseen under the HEROES Act when that act was promulgated in 2003, and that through this action that they have standing, being the six states, because the state of Nebraska would actually receive smaller amounts of income or revenue from servicing contracts for student loans. So they have this entity called NOHELA, which is the

Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority, which actually services federal student loans. So they have this entity called MOHELA, which is the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority, which actually services federal student loans and contracts with the Department of Education. They're saying because of debt cancellation, it will affect state revenues because MOHELA will receive less revenues in servicing outstanding student loan contracts. I think we have some sound from that from today. So I'm going to play that and I want to get your response on the other side. It's hard to imagine how the state of Missouri can claim an injury, putting the Lewis and Clark and the scholarship issues aside. When it's not responsible for the debts of MOLA, it's not responsible for the contracts it enters into. It doesn't own the assets of that corporation.

There is on paper no financial obligation by the state or loss to the state by anything Mojila does or anything it gets. I'm putting aside Lewis and Clark. It's hard. It's just very hard for me to say that there is an interest sufficient for the state to speak on behalf of an entity who has the right to sue or be sued. Mojila isn't here, General Crawford. Is that correct? Mojila is not here. It has the ability to sue and be sued. It's been set up as an independent corporate entity with the ability to bring suits on its own. Usually we don't allow one person to step into another's shoes

and say, I think that that person suffered a harm, even if the harm is very great. We leave it to the person, him or her or itself, to make that judgment. Now, here the state has derived very substantial benefits from setting up Mojila as an independent body with financial distance from the state and sue and be sued authority. So why isn't Mojila responsible for deciding whether to bring this suit? And Mr. Bass, on that point, there's two very distinctive standing arguments that the justices were questioning about there. One was this question of injury, saying that, well, there's no actual tangible injury that's been suffered by the state. Only injuries that are articulating are speculative at best.

And then secondarily, that Mojila is separate from the state and Mojila should be the party to the suit, as opposed to the state stepping into their place. What exactly is the argument as far as standing, as far as the plaintiffs go in this case? Yeah, I mean, I think that that's like one of the essential questions here before the court is, you know, you have Mojila, which is a separate entity stood up by the state. It was created by, under the state. So, whether or not the state actually has an interest, or if it's too attenuated, you know, to actually constitute standing. And so, a lot of justices, you know, spoke to that issue or asked a lot of questioning to address that issue.

We heard, you know, the folks bringing the case, you know, I think Campbell, you know, talked about how, you know, the legislature,, you know, talked about how, you know, the legislature is a state entity. The legislature created this. There is still financial entanglement, but that issue of financial entanglement came up quite a bit in that line of questioning for Biden v. Nebraska. And can you talk a little bit about the second case also that's before the court? So this case also proposed some interesting issues around standing as well. So in the first case, of course, there's an issue with standing due to financial entanglement. And here we have an issue with standing with regards to injury as well. So here

the plaintiffs were asserting procedural rights, saying that their procedural rights have been violated. The government's position is that they do not have standing because they are suing to overturn the underlying program, not to actually seek relief to make it better. Also, that the HEROES Act did not require notice and comment or those procedural rights that they were actually looking to have established through the HEROES program. So, in both cases, you have some unique questions regarding standing for the Supreme Court. And you have one set of justices seeking to see if those standing issues should be addressed

by the Supreme Court, and others saying, because of the political nature of debt cancellation, that maybe, speaking here of Justice Kataji Brown Jackson, saying that the Supreme Court should not take it up due to the political nature of debt cancellation and just keep the standing doctrine as is. All right. I think we have some sound from the Brown hearing also. I want to get your comment on the other side of this sound. Bottom line answer to be everybody suffered in the pandemic, but different people got different benefits because they qualified under different programs. Correct.

That's right. There's been enormous relief. There's inherent unfairness in society because we're not a society of unlimited resources. Every law has people who encompass it or people outside. Correct. That's correct. And so on that point that I believe that was Justice Kagan was making, that PPP was not fair. The EIDL loan program wasn't fair. The TARP program wasn't fair. What exactly are the plaintiffs in the Brown case arguing

when they're saying that, well, I didn't get it, so no one else would be allowed to get it either? Yeah, so the fairness question came up from a line of questioning from Chief Justice Roberts, who said, is it fair for folks to benefit? Student loan borrowers who take out student loans to benefit from debt cancellation, whereas you have someone who didn't take out a loan but started a lawn care service, you know, but would not be eligible. So is that fair? And that fairness argument, you know, played out throughout several lines of questioning from the justices. You know, I think what's at issue in this case is the plaintiffs are saying, we didn't get a chance to make our case, you know, to the federal, you know, to the United States government, to the Department of Education

through notice and comment to actually be able to say, include us, don't include this group, include that group. The government's response to that is, we're dealing with a pandemic, we're dealing with an emergency. And so they chose the HEROES Act, which according to their case, actually waives those requirements for notice and comment, so they did not have to follow those procedural steps. And on that point, you know, I think maybe the strongest argument to be made is that simply that this power lies outside of the power to the executive branch and should be something that goes through Congress. What would be the response to this question of whether or not this should be,

would be better suited as a congressional action as opposed to an action taken through the executive branch? So the government's position in this case is that Congress actually did provide that authority through the HEROES Act. modify any existing provision dealing with Title IV, which is the title of the Higher Education Act that encompasses student loans, grants, and other means of federal financial aid. So, the government's position is that Congress did provide and already did act by providing this broad authority in their interpretation that would encapsulate or encompass the president's student debt cancellation policy. And so, Congress has already spoken,

it gave clear authority, express authority that actually did foresee a circumstance like, you know, this debt cancellation policy. That's the only position in their, you know, rebuttal to that assertion. Now, it seems the administration has kind of gotten themselves into almost a Gordian knot here, because on the one hand, if the Supreme Court rules in their favor, then many people on the progressive side of the aisle will say, well, why do you cancel all of the debt if you have the authority to do so? Conversely, if the Supreme Court rules in favor of the states, then we are put back into a position where we have to wait on congressional action for any sorts of changes to our student loan relief. What do you think the administration's response will be to progressives who say, well, this is more evidence you should have canceled all debt at the beginning instead of going to court over these little small bites? So I think, you know, it's important to take the student debt cancellation policy in conjunction

with other relief policies coming out of the Department of Education or coming out of the Biden administration. So debt cancellation is one piece. You also have reforms to student loan repayment through the president's proposed income driven repayment plan which was also part of the debt cancellation announcement, changes to public service loan forgiveness, various means of helping to make borrowers whole coming out of the pandemic. And this came up quite a bit in the oral arguments is that the government is pursuing this policy because it is concerned that once repayment starts later this year, student loan repayment starts later this year, many people will become delinquent and default on their loans.

So the policy that it chose was actually to help address that issue. On the other issue, I mean, on the other question of having to come back to the drawing board, this actually came up in the Brown case or Department of Education versus Brown, because there they contend that the president actually has the authority under the Higher Education Act to do this. and so it should actually pursue debt cancellation under the Higher Education Act and not the HEROES Act, basically using another statute for that purpose. And real quick before we run out of time, given the current composition of the court and the activist nature that we've seen of the conservatives on the court, what do you think will come out of this? Do you think that the

court will hold Biden administration's program on student loans or will they repeal this and send it back to the Congress to act? You know, one of the loan borrowers who are challenging this under Brown or the states bringing suit under, you know, Biden v. Nebraska. So that's going to be one major question. And so if standing is satisfied, then I think, you know, we'll get to the merits. But standing is not satisfied. I think it'll be very hard for, you know, the Supreme Court to actually get to the merits here. So that's going to be, I think, a key piece of this. And, you know, what we'll see in the decision coming out in either May or June or later this year will actually, I think, you know, hinge on do the plaintiffs have standing being one of the major questions. And then also, you know, if the term or the words waive or modify

actually would give rise to the executive authority having power to do debt cancellation as proposed by the Biden administration. Well, I'm sure I'm certain this is going to be a very interesting case to watch. We thank you so much for all the information you provided. And we've got to have you back as more information comes out on this case, because I think it's something crucial for many of us, such as myself, who have student loans. We're definitely interested in how this plays out. Thank you so much, Jared Bass, Senior Director of Higher Education and Policy at the Center for American Progress. We're going to go to a break. We're going to do a quick check-in on Roland's speech. I think we're going to toss to Roland's speech after the break.

You're watching Roland Martin Unfiltered streaming live on the Black Star Network. The Joe Morton character, he says a whole bunch of people in this room owe Bumpy a lot of money. He said, I'm going to get that money. And it's amazing to me when we have this conversation about

what we need in Black America. And if you actually asked most black folks, what are our top five issues? We probably will say mass incarceration, criminal justice reform. We'll say ending voter suppression. We might say education. We might say crime. We might say housing. But the reality is every single one of those issues goes right back

to the money. If you study the first reconstruction, Du Bois wrote the book Black Reconstruction in America, and he actually had it for about a 20 plus year period, but in many ways it was really 12 years, 1865 to 1877, because you had a contested election in 1876 where the Republicans struck a deal with the Democrats where they said, fine, we'll let Hayes become president if you remove the last remaining federal troops out of the last three southern states. They said, we're going to leave the black people alone. Don't worry about it. They'll be fine. And the Republicans agreed to that deal in order for them to become president. And then what happened, the Great Compromise of 1877 led to 92 years of Jim Crow. And so pretty much with the Great Compromise of 1877, the Reconstruction period ended. But it really ended earlier than that because you had your Reconstruction Amendments, 13th, 14th, 15th Amendments, where you had the radical Republicans who said, we're going to push this thing through.

Now, why is that important? Because we're living in this age today where you have Democrats who love talking about bipartisanship and how we can get other folks to go along. But if you actually study the history, the radical Republicans did not give a damn about bipartisanship. They did not care what the Democrats or the Southern Democrats had to say. They literally said, if we have to pass all of these bills by ourselves, we don't care

what they have to say. That's what they would call radical Republicans. So the reason we got the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendment, known as the Reconstruction Amendments, is because the radical Republicans said, we don't care about the other side. This has to get done. It doesn't matter. Most people think that these television shows that tell stories about who we are as black men, and then they paint these monolithic portraits of us.

They think that they're being painted by white people. And I got to tell you, there are a whole bunch of black folk that are the creators, the head writers, the directors of all of these shows and that are still painting us as monoliths. The people don't really want to have this conversation. No, they don't. Next, on The Black Table, with me, Greg Carr. We featured the brand new work of Professor Angie Porter, which, simply

put, is a revolutionary reframing of the African experience in this country. It's the one legal article everyone, and I mean everyone, should read. Professor Porter and Dr. Valethia Watkins, our legal round table team, join us to explore the paper that I guarantee is going to prompt a major aha moment in our culture.

You crystallize it by saying, who are we to other people? Who are African people to others? Governance is our thing. Who are we to each other? The structures we create for ourselves, how we order the universe as African people. That's next on The Black Table, here on The Black Star Network. I'm Shante Moore. Hi, I'm B.B. Winans. Hey, I'm Dolly Simpson. What's up? I'm Lance Gross, and you're watching Roland Martin Unfiltered.

Louisiana is a state in this country with one of the largest juvenile justice disparities in the entire nation. According to PrisonPolicy.org, Louisiana has the world's highest incarceration rate. Black youth are six times more likely to be incarcerated than their white peers. Who is to blame for such a vast disparity? For the answer, joining me now from New Orleans, Louisiana is Gina Womack, the executive director of Family and Friends of Louisiana Incarcerated Children, an organization working to transform the system that puts Black children at risk for prison. Ms. Womack, thank you so much for joining us this evening. Can you talk a little bit about the numbers of the prison population there in Louisiana, because I think they're shocking to most people. Yeah. Good afternoon. Thank you so much for having me on the show this evening. At the moment in Louisiana, we have about less than 400 young people that are

incarcerated. That's down from 2000, from back in 2000 when we first started our organization. So that just really shows that having the power of the people is really important to be able to work to try to help to keep our young people out of prison. But we have a long way to go. And when we talk about disparities, you know, you talked about you dropped the number of young people incarcerated by nearly 1,600 over the course of the last 20 years, which is outstanding and amazing. But can you talk about the disparities that still exist between the number of African-American young people and white young people who are incarcerating Louisiana prisons? Yes, definitely. Still at this point, we have over 80 percent of young people who are incarcerated that are children of color, and that's far too many. And honestly,

we believe that at this point, because we've worked so hard and because there's a national trend to move away from punitive policies and to provide rehabilitation and treatment for children, we shouldn't have any young people in prison. We should have children at home in their communities. Our black children should be afforded the same opportunities for diversion programs as their white counterparts. As you've stated, we are incarcerating at least six times more here in Louisiana black children over their white counterparts, and that's about two times higher than the national average.

Now, what would you say to people? Because, you know, the opponents of this on the political right are going to say, well, you do the crime, you do the time. The reason there's six times more black children in custody than white children because black children committing six times more crime. Look at the violent crime rate in New Orleans, for example. Look at some of the communities, et cetera. What would be your response to people who think along those lines of blaming the children as opposed to blaming the system? Yeah, well, that's really unfortunate because if you really look at crime, you'll see that Black youth are not committing any more crimes than their white counterparts. They're

just incarcerated at a higher and a much alarming rate. And so what I would say is that children are children and they do make mistakes. And the reason that the juvenile system was put in place was not to be punitive, but rather to be rehabilitative, recognizing that young people can learn from their mistakes. And also, you do have to look at more information in regards on how the system fails our children. Here in Louisiana, every child servant entity is at the bottom, right? We're like 48th in educational for public school.

We're at the bottom for healthcare, mental healthcare for our young people, our public welfare systems as well. So you can clearly see that the system is failing our children. And, you know, again, our organization came into existence over 20 years ago. We're a Black-led, family-led organization organization that is made up of parents and youth. Our families were recognizing that something was amiss, right? Our families were looking for supports for their children. They couldn't find the supports they needed in the community, which if you look at the data, you'll know that children fare better when they're at home in their community with supports. And it's unfortunate that all of the child-serving entities are ranked at the bottom of the country. And so there's something there that we need to really pay more attention to and understanding the root causes.

And then also recognizing that Louisiana is, you know, still an incarceration. It's just based in racist practices. Our young people need support, services in their communities. We know that's what works. It's stated all across the country. And in Louisiana, we just have to do better. We did a lot of work and passed the Juvenile Justice Reform Act that was moving from punitive treatment to rehabilitative treatment, a model that was based on the Missouri model, making sure young people were receiving the educational opportunities.

Young people should not be removed from their communities unless they should be left in their communities with services and programs that work. Absolutely. I want to bring our panel in on this because I think there's so much we need to dive into. Dr. Carter, did you have a question for Ms. Womack? Sure.

So what have you found worked to decrease the number of incarcerated juveniles so greatly? Because, I mean, I think that's a tremendous number in such a short period of time. So if you could elaborate on sort of what has worked. Yes. So, I mean, you know, there's a whole picture around this. You know, the families said exactly what it was that they needed. The young people said what they needed. We visited Missouri and other systems that were working at that time. We passed reform mechanisms, the Juvenile Justice Reform Act of 2003, that stated that we needed to do better on the front end, right? We spent way too much money

on incarcerating our young people. We did assessments of the children and understood that many of the children at that time and still today, we have over 40 percent of young people who are incarcerated for nonviolent offenses, over the 70% of our kids that are still incarcerated are there for mental health issues. You cannot support and you should not treat children that need mental health supports and better educational opportunities inside a prison.

So what happened at that time was we assessed the children, paired them with community-based programs, and were able to send children home safely. And we do have, you know, and at that moment, Louisiana was really at the top of its game. We had an opportunity to do something that wasn't really happening across the country. It was about coordinating the services, putting, again, services in the communities, in the schools. Our young people have said over and over and over. They would like to have well-paying jobs. They need training around, like, you know, services, different kinds of trainings in school. They need mentors. You know, children want to thrive, right? And so we have to support our young people as well as our communities.

Absolutely. And Dr. Ali, real quick, do you have a question for Ms. Womack? First of all, Ms. Womack, thank you so much for the work that you're doing. I saw some amazing numbers from JusticePolicy.org, $214,000 a year to hold these young people, $588 a day. You talk a little bit about the mental health services and focusing resources. I'm curious, arts and cultural aspect, how does that help young people who have been caught up in these unfortunate situations to make the move? Yeah, I mean, I'm sure you've seen the resource. I mean, children need extracurricular activities, right? And so arts and culture is just crucial to any young person.

And so void of those things, young people don't have all the opportunities that they should have access to. And so, you know, they're more liable to make more mistakes. And so if we, you know, again, if we did the things that we do for our white kids, diversion programs, we just did an art installation, our young people are talented.

When I visit the prisons and I speak to the young people, they are, you know, they've experienced such trauma. And but they're brilliant and they're sad and they're traumatized. And in Louisiana, you know, we have crisis after crisis on top of our families largely live in poverty. So you put all of these issues together and, you know, we see what happens. However, we can really reverse that. that our children are continually paying the price for the failures of the state to really invest in our young people and in the community. Well, Ms. Womack, we really appreciate all that you're doing. I can tell people where I can find more information about everything you're working on and how they can help out with this issue. Yes, it's our organization.

You have all of the information on the website. But I did just want to mention we have a great opportunity here in Louisiana, and we're hoping that the governor of Louisiana will join us with the Office of Juvenile Justice, Delinquency and Prevention, technical support so that we can move forward on our reforms and setting up rehabilitation for our young people and making sure that we're able to move some of the young people who can be moved home safely out of prison. And also, you know, out of Angola, we recently had some young people transferred to one of the country's worst adult prisons, the Angola Penitentiary. work with our Office of Juvenile Justice Delinquency and Prevention and the Juvenile Justice Reform Implementation Commission to be able to move our children home safely. All right. Well, we appreciate all that you do, and we will keep updated on this, the work you've done is outstanding. Hopefully, we can help it going forward. We'll be back after the break. You're watching Roland Martin Unfiltered,

streaming live on the Black Star Network. On a next A Balanced Life with me, Dr. Jackie, a relationship that we have to have. We're often afraid of it and don't like to talk about it. That's right, we're talking about our relationship with money. And here's the thing, our relationship with money oftentimes determines whether we have it

or not. The truth is you cannot change what you will not acknowledge. Balancing your relationship with your pocketbook. That's next on A Balanced Life with me, Dr. Jackie, here at Black Star Network. We're all impacted by the culture, whether we know it or not. From politics to music and entertainment, it's a huge part of our lives. And we're going to talk about it every day right here on The Culture with me, Faraji Muhammad, only on the Black Star Network. On the next Get Wealthy with me, Deborah Owens, America's Wealth Coach. The wealth gap has literally not changed in over 50 years, according to the Federal Reserve. On the next Get Wealthy, I'm excited to chat with Jim Castleberry, CEO of Known Holdings. They have created a platform, an ecosystem to bring resources to blacks and people of color so they can scale their business. Even though we've had several examples of African-Americans and other people of color being able to be successful, we still aren't seeing the mass level of us being lifted up.

That's right here on Get Wealthy, only on Blackstar Network. Hi, I'm Gavin Houston. Hi, I'm Carl Painter. Hey, what's up, y'all? It's your boy, Jacob Lattimore, and you're now watching Roland Martin right now. Today on Black and Missing,

Dora Robinson was reported missing in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Their police department on February 1st, 2023, the 13-year-old is 5'4", 170 pounds, with black hair, brown eyes. She was last seen wearing black sweatpants and a Reebok patch on the left pocket, a red shirt, and a black hooded jacket. Anyone with information about Andorra Robinson is encouraged to contact the Philadelphia Police Department at 215-686-3153. Again, that's 215-686-3153. Black and Missing update on Nathaniel Williams and Felicia Johnson.

And some sad news to report about two of our black and missings. In Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, police found the body of Nathaniel Williams on Monday. The cause of death is yet to be determined. Nathaniel was last seen February 13, 2023. Also, Felicia Johnson's remains were found in Texas. Sam Houston National Forest have been identified as Felicia Johnson, who went missing April 2022. Also, Tekembewe Nakumba is charged with Felicia's murder and tampering with physical evidence. He was in custody last June but was released. Anyone with information about Chikungbue Nakumba's whereabouts is urged to contact the Houston, Texas Police Department's Homicide Division at 713-308-3600. The role in murdering unfiltered families sends our prayers to Nathaniel and Felicia's families.

Next up, in Texas, there was a gun rally this week. School Safety and Gun Rally Center took center stage at the Texas Capitol. Roland has some video of this. Hundreds of folks gathered in Austin, the state's capital, to let their voices be heard about the implementing tighter restrictions on how Texans can purchase firearms. Rowling is in Texas and saw the rally. He found a mother whose daughter was killed in San Antonio. The rally speakers included Texas State Senator Ronald Gutierrez and Uvalde's Texas mass shooting survivor, Caitlin Gonzalez. I'll have some video of Caitlin Gonzalez coming up.

Let's see if we can roll that clip. Good afternoon. My name is Caitlin Gonzalez. I am a fourth grade Robb Elementary survivor from Uvadi, Texas. On May 24th, everything changed. I was at my awards ceremony that day earlier before the shooting. As soon as we got to our class, we heard the gunshots. He wobbled my, he wobbled my... We love you, Caleb. You got it, Caleb. You got it. He walked with the door knocked.

He banged on my door. He shot at my door and a bullet went over my head. I remember hearing my best friend scream. I remember hugging her that morning. I hugged her and Eliana at the awards ceremony. I told her I would call her after school. I never got her that morning. I hugged her and Eliana at the awards ceremony. Told her I would call her after school. I never got to the call. And I was watching the news.

I saw that Eliana was missing. I texted Jackie. Eliana's missing. Are you okay? The next day, I got the news from my mom. The worst news that any child should get. I shouldn't have to be here right now, but I am because my friends don't have a voice no more.

Greg Abbott's done nothing to protect me or my friends. I had to wait there for 77 minutes. And then I heard a glass break. I had to run to the funeral home barefoot with no shoes on. I had spina's, I had glass in my foot and my foot was bruised up. I had no phone and I kept asking my mom where is she and she said I'm at the Pacific Center. They texted us to go there. I don't take those images out of my mind. and so what we um they're in a club these folks they're in a club that no one wanted to join they're in a club that people join sadly every day and they're in a club that they don't want any one of us to join. We are in here, we are here today

to ensure that we do not forget the names of their children, that we remember their names. But we're also here to demand change. We're here to tell this governor to beg this governor and others like him to do something. Do something to avoid the killing of our children.

Do something to make it harder for an 18 year old to access an AR-15 just as easy as he's accessed a Slarpy at 7-Eleven. You got a sign out there. You got a sign right there that says it's the guns. You see, Governor Abbott, it's not evil. It's not just mental health. It's not just video games. It's not just video games, it's a gun. It's an AR-15 that you put in the hands of an 18-year-old. Because Santa Fe happened and he did nothing when we lost 10 beautiful lives during that

massacre. And El Paso happened and he did nothing. And Sutherland Springs happened and he did nothing. And Sutherland Springs happened and he did nothing. And Midland Odessa happened and he did nothing. We don't want his prayers. We don't want his thoughts. Your children deserve action. My name is D'Amika Eugene, and I'm here advocating with Moms Demand Action

on behalf of my daughter Elena Amber Henderson. She was shot and killed on 9 11 22 in Hollywood Park San Antonio and we're advocating against gun violence on her behalf and in the community's behalf, because we wanna make sure that you and your family is safe and you can get out and you can go to restaurants and on vacations and love on each other in public, in open, without having the worry of a gunman coming to snatch your child's life. And just to add to that, my name is Shalita Young.

I'm her sister. Things that you guys need to be aware of, with gun violence, every single day, 120 people die with gun violence. Gun violence is the leading cause of death in children and teenagers. It's higher than COVID, it's higher than a car crash, it's higher than cancer, gun violence.

And what we're trying to do here today, we're trying to push certain agendas, and we're not trying to solve everything. We're trying to meet in t ground where NRA and moms overlap each other. So we things like why do you ha can't you be 21 to get a

and 19 year olds, they, t and they're causing more So up the age limit, why We're asking for certain things like education, gun violence, understanding it. Why can't that just be the norm? There's an issue out there called the Charleston loop. Due to the Charleston loop, you can go out there, try to get a gun. If you do a background check in three days, if you do not get an answer because it took too long, you can still get a gun. Why is that loophole there?

And because of that, the person that is named after was able to go out and kill nine people in a church because of that loophole. So we're advocating for the middle ground, the gray area so that we can make a difference here. These are things that no matter, regardless of if you're Democratic or Republican, you should be able to come in the middle and make a difference. And so that we can make a difference here. These are things that no matter, regardless of if you're Democratic or Republican, you should be able to come in the middle and make a difference. And so that's why we're here today in Austin. 75% of Republicans support what you described. What was the reaction when you met

with Republican legislators? Did you even get hearings with them? We did not. We did have appointments, but they were not available. So they sent their representatives. Depending on who we talked to- You had appointments? We had appointments. We did have appointments, but they were not available, so they sent their representatives. Depending on who we talked to. You had appointments?

We had appointments. We had appointments, and we got their representatives. And depending on who you talked to, some of their legislative directors met with us. Some of them took notes. On one case, the person didn't even take notes at all. And so what we got was schedule an appointment, maybe two weeks out and maybe five weeks out. I keep in mind, took off a full day of work to come down here. Will I do it again? Of course. But I have to take off work to come here and get in front of them to make a difference. So what we got overall was a mediocre, lackluster response that required us to keep coming back and deal with bureaucracy. My name is D'Amici.

All right, I want to bring the panel in to discuss this. Of course, we have Dr. Ali, Dr. Carter, and also now joining us, Michael Brown, former chair of the DNC Finance Committee. So I'm going to start with you, Michael. On this issue, what do you think it will take to get state-level change on gun laws, seeing the power and the strength that the gun lobby has over our legislative apparatus? It's interesting you ask that because the NRA has that strength or hold on the legislators or on the elected officials, but not necessarily on the voters. So the voters actually,

like I imagine there were some folks at that rally that support some of these right-wing GOP members that do listen to the NRA, and they continue to vote for them. And they're mad that their children don't feel safe. So they have some options. Yes, they may not have the kind of power the NRA has over their actual legislator that they voted for. But they do have a chance to vote them out. That's where the power of the vote is. Now, if they choose not to exercise it or, oh, I just hate Democrats, so I can't support the Democrats. No one's asking you to do that. You also can write a name in. You can do a lot of things besides voting for that person that won't come up, as those two young ladies talked about, about common sense gun reform. Their pitch, their pushback argument is always, oh, they're trying to take

the Second Amendment away and trying to take your guns. That's not what common sense gun reform is. If they listen to those two young ladies, I think we'd be much better off. Absolutely. Dr. Carter, kind of on that point, we always hear a lot of voices on the left saying, well, we need to ban AR-15s. When the vast majority of crimes that takes place and the vast majority of murders that take place in this country, particularly among Black communities, are with handguns, are with pistols, and wouldn't be affected by an AR-15 ban. Do you think that we need more common-sense laws, or do we have to continue with the hyperbole that just makes it seem like there's a magic bullet to end all gun crime?

Well, certainly there's no magic bullet here. And yes, AR-15s are uncommon, but when we look at some of the mass shootings we've seen, the carnage that we saw from Columbine to Uvalde involved these big guns that can shoot lots of rounds really quickly. And I think that's why people talk about AR-15s, but AR-15s are one of many kinds of weapons that we can talk about perhaps banning. But more than that, I do think we do have to have

a conversation about handgun violence. But we can be a both-and conversation. It doesn't have to be an either-or conversation. And if we can't even get agreement after Sandy Hook, where we saw children being murdered, just like we saw with Rob Elementary and Ubalde, if we can't have a real conversation about why all kinds of guns should just be available for public consumption, then I think we have sort of already lost here. There is no kind of conversation that people are willing to have unless it's absolute. And no right, of course, is absolute.

But these women here were talking about very basic things, and we can't even get people to come to the table about that. So I am very cynical about whether the pitches for handguns or AR-15s, that we're going to actually have legislation here, because there does not seem to be a lot of will, particularly on the right, to address any kind of prohibitions or restrictions on the Second Amendment. And Dr. Ali, it seems that we talk about the recalcitrance we have on the political right when it comes to addressing gun violence, but Democrats don't seem to do a lot better when it comes to addressing gun violence when they are in charge, you know, in major cities or in governor's mansions throughout the country. what exactly can be done that is actually

legislative practicable that can at least ameliorate or bring down the rate of gun violence at all in this country that doesn't get caught up into political hyperbole? Well, you know, the background checks are something that most people agree upon, but just agreeing upon is not enough. We've got to really push politicians that you're not going to get our vote if you're not going to move forward on this. We've got 43,000 people are dying every year, 395 million guns in our country. So we can begin to roll back, you know, some of the folks who have, you know, whether mental challenges or have been convicted of domestic abuse, you know, these different types of things, to begin to slow down at least a little bit of some of the lives that are being lost. Because when you've got a million people who have been shot in the last decade,

if that's not going to motivate you, I'm not sure what will. But we have to continue to utilize our vote and hold people accountable and make sure that the right things are inside of this legislation. There's literally no reason, and I'm glad you raised the fact that whether it's Democrats who are in power or Republicans, that folks have refused to move. And a part of that is, once again, that we have huge amounts of money in politics on the state level, sometimes even on the county level, and definitely on the federal level that has been slowing this process down. So as the two other experts talked about,

you know, we're hopeful, but at the same time, we understand a huge amount of work that's going to be necessary. Well, I have to, we're going to monitor these issues and I'm hoping that we don't just talk about these whenever there's a mass shooting, because there's a mass shooting every weekend in black America that don't get anywhere near the level of attention. So when we're addressing these issues of gun violence, let's address it all, not just the gun violence that titillates white people and gets them excited, but the ones that are actually affecting the quality of life in many of our communities

and taking the lives of many young black brothers around the country. We're going to go to a break. You're watching Roland Martin Unfiltered, streaming live on the Black Star Network. When you talk about blackness and what happens in black culture. We're about covering these things that matter to us, speaking to our issues and concerns. This is a genuine people powered movement.

A lot of stuff that we're not getting. You get it and you spread the word. We wish to plead our own cause to long have others spoken for us. We cannot tell our own story if we can't pay for it. This is about covering us. Invest in black-owned media. Your dollars matter. We don't have to keep asking them to cover our stuff.

So please support us in what we do, folks. We want to hit 2,000 people, $50 this month, rates $100,000. We're behind $100,000, so we want to hit 2,000 people. $50 this month. Waits $100,000. We're behind $100,000. So we want to hit that. Y'all money makes this possible. Checks and money orders go to P.O. Box 57196. Washington, D.C. 20037-0196. The Cash App is Dollar Sign RM Unfiltered. PayPal is R. Martin Unfiltered.

Venmo is RM Unfiltered. Zelle is Roland at Rolandsmartin.com. On a next A Balanced Life with me, Dr. Jackie, a relationship that we have to have. We're often afraid of it and don't like to talk about it. That's right. We're talking about our relationship with money. And here's the thing. Our relationship with money oftentimes determines

whether we have it or not. The truth is you cannot change what you will not acknowledge. Balancing your relationship with your pocketbook. That's next on A Balanced Life with me, Dr. Jackie, here at Blackstar Network. Pull up a chair, take your seat at the Black Tape with me, Dr. Greg Carr, here on the Black Star Network. Every week, we'll take a deeper dive into the world we're living in. Join the conversation only on the Black Star Network. This is De'Alla Riddle. What's up, y'all? I'm Will Packer.

I'm Chrisette Michelle. Hi, I'm Chaley Rose, and you're watching Roland Martin Unfiltered. It's a new spin on the school backpack. The founders of WearPack noticed how students were carrying more electronics and fewer books, so he set out to design something not as bulky and more stylish. He developed a patented pending detachable front handbag and backpack with an adjustable shoulder and waist bag. Chad Porter's design took off so well that he already has exclusive partnerships and licensing deals with three HBCUs, North Carolina A&T, Hampton University, and Simmons College.

Joining me now from Cleveland, Ohio, is Chad J. Porter, Hampton University, and Simmons College. Joining me now from Cleveland, Ohio, is Chad J. Porter, founder and CEO of WearPak. Mr. Porter, how are you doing this evening? I'm doing good. Thanks for having me. Well, thank you so much. Tell us about this product, because, you know, it's some of us are very nostalgic for the concept of the old book bag that we had when we were going to school, the old Jansport backpack. But you're realizing that education has changed. Talk about what inspired you to design this new product. So I recognize that the outdated backpack industry needed innovation. I've noticed that backpacks have remained the same for the past 100 years. And what do we know that's lasted the same

for 100 years that didn't need change? Nothing. So during my time as a sophomore in college, I designed, prototyped, and built the wear pack in my dorm room. And now after graduating, we have sold over 1,500 units and have secured six Division I licensing deals. Wow. Okay. And so talk about what sets wear pack apart from the rest of the market. So I'm going to give you a quick demonstration on the 5-in-1 WearPak. And our goal is, why buy a backpack when you can get a WearPak and get it all in one? So what the WearPak is, it's a front-detachable tote chest pack and backpack and shoulder bag all in one.

So let me show you. So I have my iPad here. I have my phone right here. So I can fully adjust and put on this product with the click of a button. And then in 30 seconds, I can transition the wear pack to a separate fully functioning backpack. As you see, it comes with your separate handbag and an adjustable shoulder strap that you can turn that handbag into a separate shoulder bag and or fanny pack. So boom, just like that.

I got a separate shoulder bag, a separate fanny pack. And last but not least, you can connect that detachable handbag to the backpack for extra storage. So one bag, five different uses. Wow. And so what's the storage capacity on those bags? Because I think all of us are aware that children are bringing home the AP history, the phone book size books that they're used to.

How much can the bags carry? So the book bags can carry your daily essentials, your phone wallet and keys in the front bag and in the backpack, like I put in my laptop, my iPad, and my notebook, pair of shoes, water bottles. So you're carrying those daily essentials. But as your active lifestyle moves throughout your day, you can transition the product to accommodate to your need for technology or your need to hop on a bicycle or your need to go to practice or your need to hang out with friends. It accommodates those uses. And I see you showing our stadium bags as well. Okay.

What's going to ask you about? Can you talk about the different types of bags that you have? Yeah. Okay, now, I was going to ask you about, can you talk about the different types of bags that you have? Yeah, so along with our patent-pending 5-in-1 wear packs, we also have our transitional stadium bags. So this is our Ohio State stadium bag, and the idea behind it is to get into these stadiums and fulfill security purposes, we realized that we could develop a stadium bag to do all of that combined. So it's that same innovative concept of having, you know, a bag that you can wear as a shoulder bag, a fanny pack, or a separate, you know, handbag accessory. We also have an athletic style chess piece that you can turn this stadium bag into a chess pack. So we have an innovative bag product line to accommodate you

from your fans, going to stadiums, to going to class, work, and school. Now, you might not have thought about this. Does this fit under the seat of a Spirit or a Frontier flight or something like you use that as their carry-on slash personal item?

That's perfect. No, this is amazing for travel because imagine putting this product on and just having your carry-on all of your essentials your passport your phone they're all here right where you need them that security you need and that versatility you need to carry those other products while you're touring the world on a cruise on a bike tour in france it's the perfect daily product from traveling to going to work. This is the daily essential you need. And now you talked about your partnership with six different universities,

which is outstanding. Do you have any plans to ramp this up to full-blown commercial or consumer-sized sales? A hundred percent. So we're now broaching relationships to get into Barnes & Noble's and Fanatics at these schools, as well as extending our licensing program. We're reaching out to more HBCUs now. We just spoke with affiliates of Tuskegee University, another huge HBCU, and which we'll be excited to work with. But we're not stopping there. We're looking to

take this to every college and university in the country. Absolutely. And so where do you see this company going in the next five years or so? Well, where we see this company going, you should be looking to see us in all the university collegiate markets, NBA, NFL, NHL. We want to be the next big brand. We want to be the next Nike, the next Jansport, the next Under Armour. We believe that we have those fundamentals and we have an innovative patent-pending product that we believe can take us there. All right. Well, if people want more information or if they want to order the product or they want their school to join into the Affiliated Partnership Program, where can they get more information about the product working they contact you so you can get more information at this product at our

website I see HVD Justin calm CHVD Justin calm and guess what we have a 10% unfiltered discount so use code unfiltered all caps unfED, all caps, UNFILTERED, all caps, at our website chvdjustin.com to get a 10% off on your wear pack. Be a part of this innovation. Be a part of the next best thing. Look, I think it's an outstanding product. You know, every time

I'm at the airport, I see somebody getting busted up by those Spirit and those Frontier baggage fees because they brought too big of a bag on. So if you have something that can ameliorate that and also that can deal with young people and their addiction to electronics, I think it's a great idea. I think it's something that's going to be outstanding going forward, and we look forward to supporting you. Tell people that information on where they can contact you one more time.

So you all can contact us on our Instagram or social media at at CHBD Justin. And you can contact us on our website at CHBDJustin.com. Leave us a message. Leave us a purchase. That's how we've been connecting with all of our customers and potential partners. Reach out to us. Support us. We can't wait to interact and be a part of, you know, your future college experience or alumni experience.

All right. And last question. What were people saying to you when you were a sophomore in college designing book bags in your dorm room? And what are they saying now that it's a successful product? Well, I remember using my campus job to purchase a sewing machine. I sourced my supplies on Amazon just to get started. And people were looking at us crazy. You know, I can't lie. Our first university license actually was from North Carolina A&T. Mind you, I went to a different school. So, you know, starting this on campus, I needed to grow abroad in order to get the support of this product. Funny story, I actually drove to North Carolina A&T three times while a college student to secure that license.

And, you know, the staff and administration there, you know, helped to truly bring this product to life. And now we've been able to expand from that place. So, you know, starting off, a lot of people did not see it. You know, the first Weararpack produced, you know, we grew from that and we've been building from that. Well, we really appreciate everything that you're doing. Keep us updated

on all of this and we look forward to supporting you going forward and hopefully we'll see you at the airport soon selling your bags to make sure people aren't getting busted up by them late baggage fees. Really appreciate all the work that you're doing. Thank you so much for joining us this evening. Great show tonight. Gotta thank Roland for letting me

sit in his seat tonight and kind of steward this ship. He should be back tomorrow. Gotta thank our panel, Mike Brown, also Dr. Carter and Dr. Ali. Gotta thank all of our guests for joining us today and making this an outstanding broadcast. Gotta thank everybody in the production room for making this look so smooth because I'm

doing my best up here. And as I say at the end of every show, the words of Gail Scott Heron, no matter the consequences or fears, you've got to hold on to your dreams. Hold on to your dreams, America. Holla! Folks, Black Star Network is here.

Hold no punches! I'm real revolutionary right now. Support this man, Black Media. He makes sure that our stories are told. He is holding no punches. I'm real revolutionary right now. I'm proud. Support this man, Black Media. He makes sure that our stories are told. Thank you for being the voice of Black America, Roller. Be Black. I love y'all. All momentum we have now, we have to keep this going.

The video looks phenomenal. See, there's a difference between Black Star Network and Black-owned media and something like CNN. You can't be Black-owned media and be scared. It's time to be smart. Bring your eyeballs home. You dig? Pull up a chair. Take your seat at the Black Tape. With me, Dr. Greg Carr, here on the Black Star Network.

Every week, we'll take a deeper dive into the world we're living in. Join the conversation only on the Black Star Network. Hi, I'm Dr. Jackie Hood-Martin, and I have a question for you. Ever feel as if your life is teetering and the weight and pressure of the world is consistently on your shoulders? Well, let me tell you, living a balanced life isn't easy. Join me each Tuesday on Blackstar Network for a balanced life with Dr. Jackie. We're all impacted by the culture, whether we know it or not. From politics to music and entertainment, it's a huge part of our lives. and we're going to talk about it every day right here on The Culture with me, Faraji Muhammad, only on the Black Star Network. I'm Deborah Owens, America's Wealth Coach, and my new show, Get Wealthy, focuses on the things that your financial advisor and bank isn't telling you, but you absolutely need to know.

So watch Get Wealthy on the Blackstar Network. This is an iHeart Podcast.