"These are corporations that benefited from stealing people, from stealing labor, from forced breeding, from torture, from committing numerous horrendous acts, and there's no reason why they should be able to hold onto assets they acquired through such horrendous acts," said Deadria Farmer-Paellmann, the main plaintiff in the lawsuit.
Farmer-Paellmann said she learned of Aetna's role in insuring slaves in legal classes, and then asked Aetna for old policies documenting the practice, which Aetna provided to her.
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of 35 million African-Americans. It seeks financial payments for the value of "stolen" labor and unjust enrichment and calls for the companies to give up "illicit profits." The plaintiffs are also seeking compensatory and punitive damages.
The lawsuit does not seek a specific dollar amount, but estimates slaves performed as much as $40 million worth of unpaid labor between 1790 and 1860. The current value of that labor could be as high as $1.4 trillion
The lawsuit alleges that Aetna's corporate predecessor "insured human slave owners against the loss of their human chattel."
In response, Aetna released a statement saying, "We do not believe a court would permit a lawsuit over events which -- however regrettable -- occurred hundreds of years ago. These issues in no way reflect Aetna today."
The lawsuit notes that FleetBoston is a successor to Providence Bank, which it says was founded by Rhode Island slave trader John Brown. FleetBoston had no immediate comment on the suit. The suit alleges that CSX, based in Richmond, Virginia, is a successor to numerous railroads that were built or run, at least in part, by slave labor.
In a statement, CSX said the suit is "wholly without merit and should be dismissed. The claimants named CSX because slave labor was used to construct portions of some U.S. rail lines under the political and legal system in place more than a century before CSX was formed in 1980."
Slave reparations have been a controversial issue. A CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll conducted last month found a wide difference of opinion on the issue between black and white respondents.
Nine out of 10 white respondents said the government should not make cash payments to slave descendants while 6 percent said it should.
Among black respondents, 55 percent said the government should make cash payments and 37 percent said it should not.
The poll surveyed 1,001 adults -- 820 of them white and 146 black -- February 8-10. The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 9 percentage points for black respondents and plus or minus 4 percent points for white respondents. The percentages differ because of the difference in the number of people surveyed.
The same people were asked if corporations that made profits from slavery should apologize to African-Americans. Among blacks, 68 percent said they should while 23 percent said they should not. Among whites, 32 percent said they should and 62 percent said they should not.
Three-fourths of black respondents said the companies should set up scholarship funds for descendants of slaves and 20 percent said they should not. Among white respondents, 35 percent of respondents said they favored the scholarship funds while 61 percent said they were opposed.
Slavery Reparations Effort May Have Its Day in Court
Should the descendants of black slaves be paid reparations by companies that may have profited from the slave trade? Yes, according to a New York activist who is poised to file a lawsuit in federal district court on Tuesday.
The class action lawsuit by plaintiff Deadria Farmer-Paellman will reportedly allege that Aetna, Inc., CSX Transportation and Fleet Bank were "unjustly enriched" by "a system that enslaved, tortured, starved and exploited human beings."
Two years ago, Farmer-Paellman exposed Aetna's financial ties to the institution of slavery, resulting in a public apology from the insurance giant. Aetna, founded in 1853, had insured Southern slave owners against the death of their slaves.
Farmer-Paellman is not alone in her crusade for reparations. A number of prominent black activists, legislators and lawyers have called for such payments in order to make up for alleged disparities in employment, health care, income and education. Among those supporting the idea is Johnnie Cochran, O.J. Simpson's defense attorney; Harvard law professor Charles Ogletree and Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee.
Aetna and CSX downplayed the chances of a reparations lawsuit succeeding and defended their respective outreach efforts to black Americans.
"We do not believe a court would permit a lawsuit over events which, however regrettable, occurred hundreds of years ago," said Fred Laberge, Aetna assistant vice president of public relations. "These issues in no way reflect Aetna today.
"Over the past 20 years," Laberge continued, "Aetna has invested more than $36 million in the African-American community. Our company has embraced diversity, and we are proud of our record of employing a diverse workforce and supporting diverse causes."
CSX Transportation issued a blunt reply to the pending lawsuit.
"The lawsuit to be filed in federal court in New York City against CSX and other corporations demanding financial reparations is wholly without merit and should be dismissed," read a written statement issued by the company.
"The claimants named CSX because slave labor was used to construct portions of some U.S. rail lines under the political and legal system in place more than a century before CSX was formed in 1990," the company complained. "Courtrooms are the wrong setting for this issue."
Reparations critics have said the movement is based more on politics and monetary greed than on legitimate legal claims. Washington, D.C. legal scholar Mark Behrens said the lawsuit is unlikely to succeed as a legal claim.
"What standing do the current plaintiffs have to sue for damages that allegedly may have occurred 150 years ago?" asked Behrens, who is a partner in the law firm Hook Hardy & Bacon.
In a class action lawsuit, Behrens explained, plaintiffs must show they have been injured, that they have suffered common injuries, and that they are representative of the people on whose behalf they are suing.
"For the people who may be alive today and are descendents [of slaves], there just seems to be a lot of threshold questions they may have to meet," said Behrens. "Despite the obvious inhumanities of slavery, ... I think one of the problems will be challenging a system that was wrong but at the time was legal."
Plaintiffs will face other challenges in bringing their case, said Behrens, including statutes of limitation (long since passed) and the difficulty of showing a common injury suffered by slave descendants.
"Whatever claims they are alleging, are too remote or attenuated from the direct conduct of slavery to be able to have a legal claim," said Behrens, who predicted the suit would be dismissed or, perhaps, settled out of court.
Supporters of black reparations have been buoyed by the successful effort of Holocaust survivors and their heirs to get reparations from companies that benefited from the forced labor of Jews in the 1930s and '40s.
The black reparations movement itself has had a few non-financial success stories so far. In addition to Aetna's 2000 apology, a few state legislatures have passed resolutions calling for reparations, as has the United Nations conference on racism, which was held in South Africa in September 2001. Conyers has introduced reparations legislation during the past decade, but Congress has never voted on the bill.
Back to home page