Editorial: When Justice in America Feels Conditional

This week, the Justice Department quietly moved to dismiss a 44‑year‑old consent decree—Luevano v. Ezell—originally imposed in 1981 to address discriminatory hiring practices in the federal workforce. According to the DOJ, the decree was based on “flawed and outdated theories of diversity, equity, and inclusion.” The message? Federal employment should return to relying solely on “merit.”

But to many of us—especially Black Americans—this isn’t just a legal footnote. It’s another deeply unsettling step in a broader rollback of civil rights protections. A growing pattern: dismantling consent decrees, reversing civil rights findings, and dismissing the very systems meant to level the playing field.

It’s more than policy. It’s narrative warfare. We’re once again being told that our progress is a gift of identity politics, not a result of our own brilliance, sacrifice, or grit. That if we’ve succeeded, it must be because of our race. That if we demand fairness, we’re asking too much.

If I’m being honest: I’ve thought about leaving the United States. Not out of bitterness—but out of bone-deep exhaustion. The constant demand to prove that you belong. That you’ve earned your spot. That your excellence isn’t a fluke or a favor—it’s fact.

To undo decades of legal protections without acknowledging the reasons they were necessary in the first place isn’t justice. It’s willful amnesia. It says to us: forget what came before. Be grateful for what little you have. Don’t ask for more.

I want to believe in a better America. I really do. But I also understand why so many of us are quietly wondering: what might it feel like to live somewhere you don’t have to fight this hard just to be seen as enough?

-The Advoc8te