By NAN Staff Reporter | NewsAmericasNow.com

News Americas, NEW YORK, NY, Fri. June 26, 2026: On Juneteenth – June 19, 2026 – young Ghanaian students marched through the “Door of No Return” at Christiansborg Castle in Accra in an emotional reenactment of the transatlantic slave trade, staged before African and Caribbean heads of state and delegates from more than 80 countries, gathered for the most significant global reparations conference in history.

The NEXTISTEPS High-Level Consultative Conference adopted a sweeping 19-point framework for reparatory justice – backed by both the African Union and CARICOM – calling for formal apologies, financial compensation, debt cancellation, a Global Reparations Fund, the return of looted cultural artifacts, and a right of return for descendants of enslaved Africans. The proposal is expected to be presented at the next UN General Assembly.

“History does not ask us to inherit guilt, but it asks us to inherit responsibility,” Ghanaian President John Dramani Mahama told delegates at Christiansborg Castle, as quoted by reporting on the conference.

The timing could not have been more significant. Because as African and Caribbean nations intensify their demands for reparatory justice, a landmark new book has arrived to fundamentally shift the legal and moral ground beneath those demands – and to eliminate one of the arguments Britain has historically relied upon to resist accountability.

The Book That Changes Everything

The Crown’s Silence: The Hidden History of the British Monarchy and Slavery in the Americas – authored by acclaimed US historian Brooke N. Newman and published by HarperCollins – presents what its press materials describe as undeniable archival proof, drawn from newly examined royal archives and manuscripts, that the British monarchy was not merely a passive beneficiary of the transatlantic slave trade. It was an active architect, investor, and financial beneficiary.

Drawing on records from the Royal African Company, the South Sea Company, the Royal Navy, and colonial officials, Newman demolishes Britain’s long-standing defense that colonial slavery was strictly the work of private enterprises – establishing instead that the Crown designed, funded, enforced, and profited from the Caribbean slave system across multiple monarchies spanning nearly 250 years.

“It is time to place the British Crown at the center of our analysis of the transatlantic slave trade, its legacies, and the pursuit of reparatory justice for slavery – where it belongs,” Newman writes, as quoted in the book’s notes.

The Royal Archives Tell The Story

The evidence Newman presents from the royal archives is extensive and specific. In 1564, Queen Elizabeth I became the first English monarch to invest directly in the transatlantic slave trade – fully aware of the aim of the venture – loaning the 700-ton warship Jesus of Lübeck from her Royal Navy to slaver John Hawkins in exchange for a one-sixth share of the anticipated profits from capturing and selling Africans in the Spanish Caribbean, according to the book.

By 1666, records of the Royal Adventurers – the Crown-backed trading company – show that 8,778 Africans had been disembarked in Barbados, 4,445 in Jamaica, and 1,250 in St. Kitts, Suriname, and Nevis, according to Newman’s research. Another 5,107 individuals had perished during the Atlantic crossing.

In 1672, King Charles II issued a new patent to The Royal African Company of England, granting it sole control over all English trade in African “commodities” – including, as the charter specified, “Negro Slaves” – for one thousand years, as the book documents. Under that charter, the African Company shipped more enslaved African women, men, and children to the Americas than any other single institution during the entire period of the transatlantic slave trade, according to historian William Pettigrew, as cited by Newman.

From 1672 to 1688 alone – during the reigns of Charles II and James II – nearly 100,000 Africans fell victim to the Royal African Company’s slave-trading activities across some 330 recorded transatlantic voyages, with approximately 76,000 surviving the Atlantic crossing to disembark in the English Caribbean colonies, predominantly in Barbados and Jamaica, according to Newman’s research.

The Duke of York – later King James II – was the African Company’s largest individual shareholder, subscribing £3,000 and holding regular company meetings in his own royal apartments, the book documents. He remained governor of the company and issued a proclamation defending its royal monopoly two months after ascending the throne as king.

The Royal Navy was deployed to enforce the Crown’s slave-trading monopoly – patrolling African and Caribbean waters, seizing interlopers, and convoying transatlantic deliveries of captives, according to Newman’s research. And the money flowed directly into royal coffers. By 1687, sugar and tobacco customs revenue – produced entirely by enslaved labor in the Caribbean colonies – comprised a significant share of the Crown’s income, the book documents. In the 1690s alone, customs revenue from tobacco and sugar totaled nearly £1 million, an average of £100,000 per year, according to Newman.

The Branding Of Caribbean Enslaved People

Performers reenact the branding of slaves at Christiansborg Castle in Ghana on June 19, 2026. (Photo by Ernest Ankomah/Getty Images)

Among the most disturbing revelations in the book is the Royal African Company’s systematic branding of enslaved Africans – including children – with marks denoting Crown ownership.

The company branded enslaved individuals with the acronym RACE – for the Royal African Company of England – seared into their flesh with burning irons. In instructions issued in 1699, company directors specified that enslaved individuals purchased by the company, both adults and children, were to be “mark[ed] on the right breast RACE,” and that “the children of them at three years of age” were to be similarly branded, as Newman documents.

Later, the South Sea Company – to which Queen Anne transferred the asiento contract giving Britain the exclusive right to supply enslaved Africans to Spanish America – branded enslaved individuals passing through Jamaica and Barbados with its own mark: the SSC seal topped with King George I’s state crown. The brand featuring a royal crown was a deliberate choice. The company touted its intimacy with the British monarchy as a badge of honor, as Newman’s research shows.

Jamaica served as the central Caribbean base of operations for this transatlantic trafficking system. By 1714, enslaved people made up 90 percent of the island’s total population.

The King Charles III Connection

Perhaps the most striking personal connection Newman establishes is between the current British monarchy and the Caribbean slave system. Through his maternal line, King Charles III is a direct descendant of Virginia planters who exercised ownership over African men, women, and children and profited from their coerced labor, according to Newman’s research. The lineage runs through Frances Smith, a direct descendant of Virginia planter Robert Porteus, who married Claude Bowes-Lyon – whose granddaughter was Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, wife of King George VI and mother of Queen Elizabeth II.

Over the course of her 70-year reign, Queen Elizabeth II never addressed the foundational role of the monarchy in Britain’s transatlantic slave trade and mass enslavement of Africans, according to Newman. Her reticence, the book argues, was strategic.

“The queen’s silence did not go unnoticed,” Newman writes, as quoted in the book’s notes. “Preserving her policy of silence until the bitter end, the queen went to her grave with her lips permanently sealed on the subject of the monarchy’s historic links to slavery. But silence, however seemingly effective in the moment, cannot erase the past or expunge its enduring impacts.”

What The Book Means For Reparations

The significance of Newman’s archival findings for the Caribbean reparations movement is direct and profound. Britain has long shielded itself from financial accountability for the transatlantic slave trade by arguing that colonial slavery was a private enterprise – the work of merchants, planters, and trading companies operating with minimal Crown direction. If slavery was primarily a private commercial affair, the argument runs, the modern British state bears limited direct responsibility and the monarchy even less.

Newman’s royal archives dismantle that argument entirely. The Crown was not a bystander to the Caribbean slave system. It was the architect. It granted the monopoly charters. It deployed the Royal Navy. It enforced compliance. It collected the customs revenue. It personally invested in the slave-trading companies. It branded enslaved people with royal marks. And it profited – substantially, directly, and over generations – from the labor of hundreds of thousands of enslaved Africans in the Caribbean.

As Newman demonstrates, four centuries of royal silence have only deferred an inevitable reckoning. The Crown’s Silence proves that contemporary demands for reparations are not new claims, but long-overdue accounts waiting to be settled.

The Caribbean’s Moment

The confluence of the Accra conference, the AU’s launch of its Decade on Reparations – 2026 to 2036 – and the publication of The Crown’s Silence arrives at a moment of unprecedented global momentum for the reparatory justice movement. CARICOM’s 10-Point Plan for Reparatory Justice – including formal apologies, the erasure of the unjust debt burden, and financial compensation – carries renewed urgency alongside the archival evidence Newman has now placed in the public record.

Multiple Caribbean nations are actively reassessing their constitutional relationships with the British monarchy and moving toward becoming republics. The question of what Britain owes the Caribbean is no longer merely academic or political. It is, thanks to the royal archives Brooke Newman has examined and published, now undeniably documented. The 19-point framework adopted in Accra calls on all state and non-state institutions that have not yet provided justice for the transatlantic slave trade to offer “full, formal and unconditional apologies as a foundational step towards reconciliation, trust-building and reparatory justice.”

The British monarchy is a state institution. And thanks to The Crown’s Silence, the receipts are now in the public record.

RELATED: The Untold Story Of The Deacons For Defense: The Hidden Guardians Of The Civil Rights Movement

By Staff Reporter | NewsAmericasNow.com

News Americas, WASHINGTON, D.C, Thurs. June 25, 2206: The United States Supreme Court today, June 25th, cleared the path for the potential deportation of 350,000 Haitians and 6,100 Syrians – ruling 6-3 along ideological lines that the Trump administration has the legal authority to end Temporary Protected Status for both groups in the highly watched Haiti TPS case.

The decision comes as the Trump administration has moved to terminate TPS for nationals of 13 out of 17 countries that held the designation when President Biden left office – part of what the administration describes as a broader crackdown on immigration.

For the Haitian diaspora – and particularly for the hundreds of thousands of Haitian Americans who have built lives, careers, and families in the United States under TPS protections – the ruling represents one of the most consequential legal setbacks in recent memory.

The Ruling

Writing for the 6-3 majority, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. held that federal law prohibits courts from second-guessing an administration’s determination to strip TPS protections. “This text is clear, and its plain meaning is very broad,” Alito wrote, as quoted in the ruling.

The court also rejected claims that the administration’s decision to end TPS for Haitians was driven by racial hostility – a finding that drew a blistering response from the court’s three liberal justices.

“The Statements Fairly Shout”

Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the three dissenting justices, quoted extensively from President Trump’s own public statements about Haitian immigrants in making the case that race had entered into the administration’s decision.

The dissent cited Trump’s false accusations during the 2024 campaign that Haitians in Springfield, Ohio, ate their neighbors’ pets – a claim that was widely debunked – and his December comments describing Haitian immigrants as undesirable because they come from a “filthy, dirty, disgusting” country.

“The statements fairly shout, in their racial undertones and overtones alike, that race entered into the president’s resolve to remove Haitians from this country,” Kagan wrote, as quoted in the ruling.

The administration’s solicitor general D. John Sauer argued during oral arguments that Trump’s statements were “unilluminating” and referenced poverty and crime rather than race – and that federal law makes clear courts cannot second-guess the government’s TPS decisions regardless of the motivation behind them.

The majority agreed. The dissent did not.

What Temporary Protected Status Is

Viles Dorsainvil (R), Executive Director of the Haitian Support Center, and Associate Pastor Brandon Peterson (C) of Greater Grace Temple in Springfield, Ohio, listen to a prayer outside the US Supreme Court in Washington, DC, on March 17, 2026. The US Supreme Court agreed on March 16 to consider the Trump administration’s bid to strip Haitians and Syrians of temporary deportation protections. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has announced plans to end so-called Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for some 350,000 Haitians and 6,000 Syrians. (Photo by ROBERTO SCHMIDT / AFP via Getty Images)

Temporary Protected Status was created by Congress with bipartisan support in 1990 to provide temporary legal status to people whose home countries were deemed unsafe because of war, natural disasters, or other crises. The program allows TPS holders to live and work legally in the United States for periods of six to 18 months, with no limit on how many times a country’s designation can be renewed.

For Haiti – a country that has faced a devastating earthquake, political instability, and now widespread gang violence that has rendered parts of the country ungovernable – TPS had been repeatedly extended, becoming effectively permanent for hundreds of thousands of Haitian nationals living in the United States.

The program had similarly been extended repeatedly for Syrians, whose country has been consumed by civil war for over a decade.

CAIR REACTS

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, today said a U.S. Supreme Court ruling allowing the Trump administration to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) protections for hundreds of thousands of Haitian and Syrian immigrants without any judicial review will harm families, destabilize communities, and place vulnerable individuals at risk.

CAIR also expressed disagreement with a conclusion by non-binding plurality of judges that there was likely insufficient evidence to conclude that racism motivated the TPS termination in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.

The ruling clears the way for the administration to end TPS protections for approximately 350,000 Haitians and more than 6,000 Syrians who have been living and working legally in the United States. TPS was created by Congress to protect people from deportation to countries facing war, natural disasters, or other extraordinary conditions. Haitians first received TPS after the devastating 2010 earthquake, while Syrians were granted TPS in 2012 because of the civil war in their homeland.

Last year, CAIR welcomed a federal court order delaying the Trump administration’s termination of TPS for Syria and warned that forcing Syrians to return prematurely could expose them to danger and family separation.

In a statement, CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad said: “Temporary Protected Status was established to ensure that people are not forced to return to countries facing extraordinary and dangerous conditions. Ending these protections for hundreds of thousands of Haitians and thousands of Syrians will tear families apart, disrupt workplaces and communities, and place vulnerable individuals at risk.

“Many TPS holders have lived in our nation for years, raised American children, built businesses, contributed to our economy, and become integral members of their communities. Policies that target these families for deportation because of their race and ethnicity are contrary to our nation’s values.

“Congress should pursue legislative solutions to make clear that courts do indeed have the authority to review TPS termination decisions, to recognize the contributions of TPS recipients, and to protect families from unnecessary hardship and separation.”

What Happens Now

The Supreme Court’s ruling clears a legal path for deportations – but the timeline and process remain complex.

The ability of the government to quickly expel TPS holders will depend significantly on whether individuals already have deportation orders pending. In many instances TPS holders have not received such orders – which will allow them some ability to contest their removal from the country through the immigration court system.

Class action lawsuits had been filed by TPS holders – including engineers, students, doctors, and caregivers – who argued they could be killed if forced to return to Syria or Haiti. Lower court judges had sided with the Haitians and Syrians, finding that the homeland security secretary’s process was subject to court review and that her decisions had been preordained rather than based on meaningful analysis of country conditions.

The Supreme Court overruled those findings Thursday. The ruling is also likely to have significant implications for TPS holders from approximately a dozen other countries beyond Haiti and Syria.

The Broader Context

Thursday’s ruling arrives as part of a sweeping transformation of American immigration policy under the Trump administration – one that has fallen with particular force on Caribbean communities.

The administration has separately halted the resettlement of refugees and dramatically slowed the consideration of asylum claims. It has proposed tougher rules making work permits harder for immigrants to obtain. It has filed denaturalization cases against naturalized American citizens at an unprecedented pace – targeting 200 cases per month. And it has moved to end TPS for nationals of 13 countries.

The Supreme Court’s ruling Thursday – combined with its separate ruling last year allowing the administration to lift protections for more than 300,000 Venezuelans – signals that the legal architecture supporting humanitarian immigration protections is being dismantled with the blessing of the nation’s highest court.

For the 350,000 Haitians who have lived and worked legally in the United States under TPS – many of whom have been here for years, raised children who are American citizens, built businesses, and contributed to their communities – the ruling poses an existential threat to the lives they have built.

What Haitian TPS Holders Should Do Now

Immigration attorneys are urging Haitian TPS holders to take immediate action:

Consult a licensed immigration attorney – not a notario – about your specific situation and any alternative pathways to legal status.

Do not assume you must leave immediately – the process for actual deportation is complex and TPS holders without pending deportation orders retain some ability to contest removal.

Check whether you or your children qualify for other forms of relief – including US-born children, marriage to US citizens, or other visa categories.

Stay informed – the legal situation is evolving rapidly.