Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Policies to revise and erase history from school curricula target black children

Policies to revise and erase history from school curricula target black children
Getty Images

Nicole Y. Culliver, PhD. is a Public Voices fellow of The OpEd Project and The National Black Child Develop Institute.

As Florida Governor Ron DeSantis leads the charge in trying to regulate middle school curriculum to teach students that “slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit,” his main target is young Black children who will be most impacted by this false rhetoric and revisionist history. This erasure is another act of stealing the innocence that Black children were never given.


Black children remain silenced and stuck in the time warp of old slave practices that permeate many American systems with treatment standards that vary little from those used during slavery. DeSantis is using such practices and in essence is robbing young Black children of their identity.

To say Black childhood innocence is lost may be a misstatement, because Black children's innocence was never established, because it was stolen at the inception of American slavery. A declaration in government policy and early care organizational policies are needed to recognize that Black children are innocent and must explicitly recognize the Black child.

Black children were never seen as innocent children, and—like Black men and women—they were seen as property for financial gain and treated like animals. The information on Black childhood slavery has been little to none, as if it has been kept secret because of the theft. Black children worked in a variety of labor jobs as young as four years old and as caregivers and companions for white children and other slave children on the plantation until the slave owner decided for them to go work in the fields where they put in equal hours as adults. This cruelty was the norm and accounts for stolen innocence that has remained lost to the Black child.

American consensus is that children and the early childhood years are essential in setting the foundation for a healthy adulthood. We saw this first push in the 60’s with the government's head start program which was initiated as an community outreach program launching early development centers across the country for young children living in poverty.

Currently, this government program often finds bipartisan support and continues helping many American children by addressing some of their basic needs, especially those living in poverty. In addition, early care funding across states has become a mainstay in budgets, giving credence that the innocence of childhood and the well-being of the youngest Americans is a thing. However, these initiatives were created for the mainstream child and children living in poverty. While society has juxtaposed the mainstream child innocence and child living in poverty, the Black child is essentially nonexistent.

A recent experimental viral video demonstrates that many still don't see the Black child as innocent. The video shows two children, one white and one Black, standing alone in downtown New York to see if people would help them. While the white child received help and comfort, the Black child received none. She was rendered invisible.

Over the years, research has exposed this stolen innocence throughout different American systems where Black children's innocence is ignored and defaulted to the original slave system practices of our country. One example is the consistent practice of the adultification of Black children. Juvenile Court Statistics found within the U.S. 52.5 percent of black youth were transferred to the adult system by Juvenile Judges four times more that of white youth, despite being only 14 percent of the overall youth population.

America's healthcare system's oath to not harm consistently mistreats Black pediatric patients who are often given less pain medication for the same treatment as their counterparts. School systems have been harshly criticized for the disproportionately high rate of school suspension for Black kindergarten boys, calling it the gateway of the preschool to prison pipeline.

There is no racial justice currently for the protection or acknowledgment of Black children's innocence. It's time we recognize and find the lost innocent identity of the Black child.

Read More

news app
New platforms help overcome biased news reporting
Tero Vesalainen/Getty Images

The Selective Sanctity of Death: When Empathy Depends on Skin Color

Rampant calls to avoid sharing the video of Charlie Kirk’s death have been swift and emphatic across social media. “We need to keep our souls clean,” journalists plead. “Where are social media’s content moderators?” “How did we get so desensitized?” The moral outrage is palpable; the demands for human dignity urgent and clear.

But as a Black woman who has been forced to witness the constant virality of Black death, I must ask: where was this widespread anger for George Floyd? For Philando Castile? For Daunte Wright? For Tyre Nichols?

Keep ReadingShow less
Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making
Mount Rushmore
Photo by John Bakator on Unsplash

Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making

No one can denounce the New York Yankee fan for boasting that her favorite ballclub has won more World Series championships than any other. At 27 titles, the Bronx Bombers claim more than twice their closest competitor.

No one can question admirers of the late, great Chick Corea, or the equally astonishing Alison Krauss, for their virtually unrivaled Grammy victories. At 27 gold statues, only Beyoncé and Quincy Jones have more in the popular categories.

Keep ReadingShow less
A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

Trump’s mass deportations promise security but deliver economic pain, family separation, and chaos. Here’s why this policy is failing America.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

The Cruel Arithmetic of Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

As summer 2025 winds down, the Trump administration’s deportation machine is operating at full throttle—removing over one million people in six months and fulfilling a campaign promise to launch the “largest deportation operation in American history.” For supporters, this is a victory lap for law and order. For the rest of the lot, it’s a costly illusion—one that trades complexity for spectacle and security for chaos.

Let’s dispense with the fantasy first. The administration insists that mass deportations will save billions, reduce crime, and protect American jobs. But like most political magic tricks, the numbers vanish under scrutiny. The Economic Policy Institute warns that this policy could destroy millions of jobs—not just for immigrants but for U.S.-born workers in sectors like construction, elder care, and child care. That’s not just a fiscal cliff—it is fewer teachers, fewer caregivers, and fewer homes built. It is inflation with a human face. In fact, child care alone could shrink by over 15%, leaving working parents stranded and employers scrambling.

Meanwhile, the Peterson Institute projects a drop in GDP and employment, while the Penn Wharton School’s Budget Model estimates that deporting unauthorized workers over a decade would slash Social Security revenue and inflate deficits by nearly $900 billion. That’s not a typo. It’s a fiscal cliff dressed up as border security.

And then there’s food. Deporting farmworkers doesn’t just leave fields fallow—it drives up prices. Analysts predict a 10% spike in food costs, compounding inflation and squeezing families already living paycheck to paycheck. In California, where immigrant renters are disproportionately affected, eviction rates are climbing. The Urban Institute warns that deportations are deepening the housing crisis by gutting the construction workforce. So much for protecting American livelihoods.

But the real cost isn’t measured in dollars. It’s measured in broken families, empty classrooms, and quiet despair. The administration has deployed 10,000 armed service members to the border and ramped up “self-deportation” tactics—policies so harsh they force people to leave voluntarily. The result: Children skipping meals because their parents fear applying for food assistance; Cancer patients deported mid-treatment; and LGBTQ+ youth losing access to mental health care. The Human Rights Watch calls it a “crueler world for immigrants.” That’s putting it mildly.

This isn’t targeted enforcement. It’s a dragnet. Green card holders, long-term residents, and asylum seekers are swept up alongside undocumented workers. Viral videos show ICE raids at schools, hospitals, and churches. Lawsuits are piling up. And the chilling effect is real: immigrant communities are retreating from public life, afraid to report crimes or seek help. That’s not safety. That’s silence. Legal scholars warn that the administration’s tactics—raids at schools, churches, and hospitals—may violate Fourth Amendment protections and due process norms.

Even the administration’s security claims are shaky. Yes, border crossings are down—by about 60%, thanks to policies like “Remain in Mexico.” But deportation numbers haven’t met the promised scale. The Migration Policy Institute notes that monthly averages hover around 14,500, far below the millions touted. And the root causes of undocumented immigration—like visa overstays, which account for 60% of cases—remain untouched.

Crime reduction? Also murky. FBI data shows declines in some areas, but experts attribute this more to economic trends than immigration enforcement. In fact, fear in immigrant communities may be making things worse. When people won’t talk to the police, crimes go unreported. That’s not justice. That’s dysfunction.

Public opinion is catching up. In February, 59% of Americans supported mass deportations. By July, that number had cratered. Gallup reports a 25-point drop in favor of immigration cuts. The Pew Research Center finds that 75% of Democrats—and a growing number of independents—think the policy goes too far. Even Trump-friendly voices like Joe Rogan are balking, calling raids on “construction workers and gardeners” a betrayal of common sense.

On social media, the backlash is swift. Users on X (formerly Twitter) call the policy “ineffective,” “manipulative,” and “theater.” And they’re not wrong. This isn’t about solving immigration. It’s about staging a show—one where fear plays the villain and facts are the understudy.

The White House insists this is what voters wanted. But a narrow electoral win isn’t a blank check for policies that harm the economy and fray the social fabric. Alternatives exist: Targeted enforcement focused on violent offenders; visa reform to address overstays; and legal pathways to fill labor gaps. These aren’t radical ideas—they’re pragmatic ones. And they don’t require tearing families apart to work.

Trump’s deportation blitz is a mirage. It promises safety but delivers instability. It claims to protect jobs but undermines the very sectors that keep the country running. It speaks the language of law and order but acts with the recklessness of a demolition crew. Alternatives exist—and they work. Cities that focus on community policing and legal pathways report higher public safety and stronger economies. Reform doesn’t require cruelty. It requires courage.

Keep ReadingShow less
Multi-colored speech bubbles overlapping.

Stanford’s Strengthening Democracy Challenge shows a key way to reduce political violence: reveal that most Americans reject it.

Getty Images, MirageC

In the Aftermath of Assassinations, Let’s Show That Americans Overwhelmingly Disapprove of Political Violence

In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination—and the assassination of Minnesota state legislator Melissa Hortman only three months ago—questions inevitably arise about how to reduce the likelihood of similar heinous actions.

Results from arguably the most important study focused on the U.S. context, the Strengthening Democracy Challenge run by Stanford University, point to one straightforward answer: show people that very few in the other party support political violence. This approach has been shown to reduce support for political violence.

Keep ReadingShow less