Shock! $25K Handouts to 44 Residents Ignites Lawsuit

An Illinois city just handed out over a million dollars in taxpayer-funded cash payments based solely on race, despite ongoing constitutional challenges that could shut down this controversial program permanently.

Story Snapshot

Evanston distributed $25,000 cash payments to 44 Black residents in February 2026 as part of its reparations program
The city has now awarded over $6.35 million to 254 individuals based on race, facing a federal lawsuit alleging 14th Amendment violations
Funding relies on cannabis and real estate taxes, with no philanthropic donations received in 2026 and sustainability concerns mounting
Judicial Watch challenges the program as “clearly discriminatory and unconstitutional” while city officials defend it as addressing historic housing discrimination

Race-Based Payments Trigger Constitutional Concerns

Evanston’s Reparations Committee announced in February 2026 that 44 qualifying Black residents would receive $25,000 direct cash payments, bringing total distributions to over $6.35 million awarded to 254 individuals since the program’s inception. The payments require no restrictions on use, allowing recipients to spend funds on housing, debt, groceries, or any other purpose. This represents a stark departure from earlier program designs that limited payments to housing-related expenses, raising fundamental questions about government distribution of taxpayer funds based explicitly on racial classification.

Legal Battle Challenges Program’s Foundation

Judicial Watch filed a federal lawsuit challenging the program’s constitutionality, arguing that race-based eligibility violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. President Tom Fitton stated the city must be stopped before spending more money on what he called a “clearly discriminatory and unconstitutional reparations program.” The legal challenge strikes at the core issue: whether municipal governments can lawfully distribute public funds using race as the sole eligibility criterion, regardless of the historical justifications offered. This case could set precedent affecting similar initiatives nationwide.

Funding Model Reveals Sustainability Crisis

The program relies primarily on cannabis sales tax and real estate transfer tax revenue, with the city pledging $10 million over ten years when established in 2019. However, as of January 31, 2026, the fund received no philanthropic donations that year, contradicting initial expectations that private contributions would supplement public funding. City Council member Krissie Harris acknowledged constraints, explaining the city pays only as money accumulates. With $276,588 in recent real estate tax revenue funding $1.1 million in new payments, the mathematics suggest serious challenges meeting the ten-year commitment without dramatic revenue increases or reduction in payment amounts.

Historical Claims Versus Current Realities

Proponents justify the program by citing discriminatory zoning laws from 1919 to 1969 that restricted Black residents to Evanston’s 5th Ward. Former City Council member Robin Rue Simmons emphasizes that harmed communities should determine what repair looks like for them, advocating for unrestricted cash payments. Yet the program’s scope raises practical questions: with Evanston’s Black population exceeding 12,000 residents, the current distribution rate reaching 254 individuals represents a fraction of those potentially affected. The $25,000 payment amount, while significant to recipients, appears modest compared to decades of alleged wealth extraction through discriminatory policies, creating questions about whether this constitutes meaningful reparations or symbolic gesturing.

Precedent-Setting Impact on National Policy

As the nation’s first formal municipal reparations program with direct cash payments, Evanston’s initiative influences state and local governments nationwide exploring similar frameworks. The program evolved from restricted housing benefits approved in 2021 to unrestricted cash payments approved unanimously by the City Council in April 2023. This expansion reflects progressive advocacy for recipient autonomy but intensifies constitutional concerns about government racial classifications. The legal outcome will likely determine whether other municipalities can implement race-based payment programs or whether such initiatives violate fundamental equal protection principles regardless of historical justifications offered.

The program’s supporters emphasize addressing historical wrongs and providing tangible recognition of past discrimination. City Council member Bobby Burns argues recipients should use funds as they see fit, whether for home repairs, mortgage interest, groceries, or vehicle repairs. However, critics contend that using current taxpayer funds to compensate individuals for discrimination none of them personally experienced, paid by taxpayers who committed no discriminatory acts, represents a fundamental departure from constitutional principles of equal protection and individual rather than collective responsibility.