California Law Requires Companies to Disclose Slavery Ties
A new law mandates that large corporations research and reveal any historical connections to slavery, a move criticized as prioritizing past grievances over present educational needs.
California Governor Gavin Newsom has signed Assembly Bill 2599, also known as the Truth in Disclosure Act, into law. The legislation requires companies operating in California that had a pre-existing presence before 1965 to investigate and publicly disclose any ties to slavery dating back to 1849. The law mandates a review of corporate records, including those of parent companies, subsidiaries, and predecessors, for evidence of selling, leasing, using enslaved people as collateral for loans, or insuring enslaved individuals.
Eli Steele, an author and filmmaker, argues that the law is a misguided attempt to address historical injustices, diverting attention from current educational failures. He points to California's latest test scores, released October 15, showing that only 33.7% of Black students met state standards in English and 21.5% in math. "Our state is busy chasing the ghost of past crimes while ignoring the very crimes of miseducation taking place today," Steele wrote.
Under AB 2599, companies meeting the criteria—those with over $100 million in annual worldwide revenue and existing before 1965—will be legally obligated to conduct this historical review. The first disclosures are anticipated by January 15, 2029, with records to be maintained online indefinitely. Steele suggests this process will generate public confessions of past sins, creating a database of grievances that activists can leverage.
Steele posits that the law is driven by a concept he terms "White guilt," which he defines not as personal feelings of guilt but as a collective obligation for white individuals to bear the sins of past slave owners and segregationists. He argues this dynamic creates a transactional relationship where Black leaders sell victimization and white individuals purchase innocence. "White guilt doesn't have anything to do with actual feelings of guilt," Steele stated, quoting his father, Shelby Steele.
According to Steele, this symbiosis between "White guilt" and "Black power" incentivizes activists to continuously seek out new grievances to maintain their influence. He notes that on the same day AB 2599 was signed, Governor Newsom vetoed a bill that would have exempted reparations payments from state income tax, suggesting a selective approach to financial commitments.
The author of the bill, Democratic Assemblymember Isaac Bryan, indicated that companies in sectors such as agriculture, banking, and insurance are likely to be among those required to file disclosures. Bryan stated that once the public has this information, "it's up to us to decide what that means and what we're going to do about it," a statement Steele interprets as a veiled threat to set a price for atonement.
Steele contends that the focus on historical disclosures distracts from the pressing issues of educational underperformance among Black students in California. He fears that the data unearthed by AB 2599 will be used to reinforce narratives of systemic racism, preventing future generations from acknowledging progress and focusing on contemporary challenges.
He suggests that corporations, fearing reputational damage and public condemnation, will likely comply with the law by issuing statements of regret and funding initiatives, rather than challenging the mandate. This compliance, Steele argues, perpetuates the cycle of White guilt and Black power, a dynamic he believes is detrimental to genuine societal progress and the future development of Black children.