Skip to main content

What Shall I Do With My Boy?

Click here for updates on this story

    August 4, 2026 (Houston Style Magazine) — In 1836, four white apprentices beat Frederick Douglass nearly blind in a Baltimore shipyard.

He named them years later. Ned North. Ned Hays. Bill Stewart. Tom Humphreys. One came at him with a brick. One swung a handspike into his head. Fifty white carpenters watched. None said stop.

They said the Black caulkers were “eating the bread which should be eaten by American freemen.” Douglass saw past that. The white man, he wrote, “is robbed by the slave system of the just results of his labor.” The men who owned that system taught poor whites to fight poor Blacks. It kept them both poor.

He escaped to New Bedford, a trained caulker in a free town of Quakers and abolitionists. A shipowner tried to hire him. Every white man on the vessel threatened to walk. He shoveled coal instead.

Still no bench for him.

In 1853 he asked Harriet Beecher Stowe to help him build a school where Black boys could learn a trade. There were fathers, he said, “whose minds are tossed by day and by night with the anxious enquiry, ‘what shall I do with my boys?'”

The school was never built. The question never went away.

Ask it again now. Manufacturing jobs peaked in June 1979 and fell for forty years. In the 1950s, 98 of every 100 American men in their prime worked or looked for work. Today it is 89. Black men lived this first.

Then we told every child that college was the only road. Georgetown researchers project only 42 percent of jobs will require a degree by 2031. We closed the shop classes and called it progress. The old track had sorted Black and brown children into dead ends. We did not fix the sorting. We tore out the ladder and left the wall.

Now hear what we tell the boys. The Pentagon studied who could enlist. Seventy-seven percent of Americans aged 17 to 24 cannot qualify. Too heavy. A record. A pill. A test.

Three out of four, told they are not wanted. Then the Army did something quiet. In 2022 it opened a course at Fort Jackson for the ones who failed the standards. It taught them until they met them. About 95 percent passed.

Chaz Andrews had wanted to serve since he was 19. He failed the entrance test more than ten times. He was 29 when the course got him through. Nothing was wrong with Chaz Andrews.

Hugh Price saw this coming. He helped start the National Guard Youth Challenge Program, which lifts dropouts’ earnings 20 percent. The military, the former Urban League president wrote, “figured out long ago how to nurture the potential of aimless young people.”

He did not want to militarize childhood. He wanted the method. High expectations for everyone. A mentor who knows your name. A refusal to sort children into the ones worth teaching and the ones worth writing off.

Charlie Rangel asked the other half. He came home to Harlem from Korea with a Purple Heart and pushed for universal national service. “If we are going to send our children to war,” he wrote, “the governing principle must be shared sacrifice.”

Rangel answered who serves. Price answered how people are made.

Maryland is testing both. Republican Larry Hogan dropped the degree requirement for most state jobs, and hiring without degrees rose 41 percent in four months. Democrat Wes Moore built the first statewide service year in America.

That is real. So is this. Congress has not reauthorized the National Apprenticeship Act since 1937.

Further along than we were. Nowhere near done.

My father ran a Head Start center in San Diego in the late sixties. What surprised him was who objected. Not only men who hated Black children. Also, comfortable people who did not want anybody’s poor children given a head start, white ones included.

We would rather sort children than teach them.

Douglass asked what he should do with his boys. We still owe him an answer.

Ten years after Los Angeles burned, I stood backstage waiting to speak. Jack Kemp was at the lectern, pounding it. Our kids, he shouted. Our kids. Our kids.

An elder from South Central asked me where he was from. Upstate New York, I said.

Then whose kids is he talking about?

All of them, ma’am. They are all American children.

The notion stunned her. It should not stun anyone. It still does.

A country is not a nation until it claims them all.

photo

Ben Jealous is a professor of practice at the University of Pennsylvania and former president and CEO of the NAACP.

Please note: This story was provided to CNN Wire by an affiliate and does not contain original CNN reporting. This content carries a strict local market embargo. If you share the same market as the contributor of this article, you may not use it on any platform.

Kierra Lee
KIELEESTYLE@GMAIL.COM
4096658446

Trump’s unfinished ballroom faces uncertain path after latest legal blow

(CNN) — President Donald Trump has dug himself a hole.The future of construction on his sprawling East Wing ballroom is uncertain after a divided appeals court ruled Friday that he is unlawfully constructing the project.What happens next could be up to the nation’s highest court — to which Trump said he’d appeal — potentially Congress and maybe even his successor.“There is no clear path to this being resolved one way or the other while he is president. The likelihood that we have a hole in the ground because of political realities — not because of construction realities — is very high through the end of his term,” said Greg Werkheiser, a historic preservationist and lawyer who is embroiled in a separate lawsuit with the White House over another Trump pursuit, an effort to paint the nearby Eisenhower Executive Office Building.The ballroom — like many of Trump’s construction projects around Washington, DC — is unpopular with the public. But it’s a major priority for the president, who has championed it at every opportunity and been involved in design details big and small.“The entire Complex, Military and all, is largely built, fabricated, and paid for. Much is already on site, or being delivered,” Trump wrote on Truth Social after Friday’s ruling, blasting the court and asking why the nation’s top historic preservation group didn’t sue before construction started.Nearly six months of constructionPlanning for the ballroom began in the early months of Trump’s second term, with the White House formally announcing it on July 31, 2025.The announcement made no mention of demolishing the East Wing, which for decades served as headquarters for first ladies and their staff, nor did it frame the project as a national security imperative — an argument Trump didn’t begin making until February 2026.In late October 2025, the East Wing was razed and workers began a monthslong excavation effort resulting in a very large hole in the ground. The National Trust for Historic Preservation launched a legal challenge in December.In late February 2026, crews began work on the foundation, filling in that hole with the below-ground portion of the building, which will house a highly secretive underground bunker complex aimed at modernizing aging underground infrastructure.So far, according to a CNN analysis of photos and floor plans, the above-ground construction of the ballroom has been limited to pouring heavily reinforced concrete columns, walls and floors. The areas where the concrete frame has been completed include new offices for the first lady, some of the kitchen and some entry halls. Above the ground floor, crews have built four towering walls, almost to the planned height of the building, and begun assembling formwork to pour the floor of the actual ballroom.Construction has progressed at a rapid pace, but the new structure isn’t close to being occupiable.As the scope of the project has evolved, so has the price tag. The ballroom was initially introduced at “approximately $200 million,” with Trump emphasizing it would be privately paid for as the cost ticked up to $300 and then $400 million.Then this spring, Senate Republicans requested $1 billion that would go, in part, toward security related to the project, although that effort ultimately failed, with some in Trump’s own party worried about the optics of funding a ballroom while Americans are struggling. The funding picture became more complicated when a project summary, obtained by the Washington Post in June, estimated its price at $600 million, more than half of which would come from taxpayers.What happens nextThe crux of the legal challenge isn’t the 90,000-square-foot structure, its placement atop the South Lawn or even the 2025 demolition of the historic East Wing. Instead, it’s the processes Trump ignored along the way: bypassing congressional approval and breaking ground before required reviews and assessments were completed.The president maintains the project isn’t subject to any oversight. But it’s become mired in a complicated legal battle without a clear resolution ahead.This state of uncertainty, Werkheiser told CNN, “illustrates that the morass he’s gotten himself into with all these projects. It’s not that he can’t do them. It’s just that he refuses to do them legally, and that makes it that much more difficult for him to execute them than they would be if he just followed the rules in the first place.”On Friday, the appeals court said Trump must stop construction until Congress approves the project, but the judges paused their ruling for two weeks so the administration could have a chance to appeal to the Supreme Court — which Trump vowed to do “immediately.” Once that request is in, the justices will have to decide whether they will let the lower-court ruling take effect for now.Separately, the Supreme Court will also have to decide whether it will review the lower-court ruling against the project at all. Should the justices take up the case, recent divisions within the court’s conservative supermajority suggest that a win for Trump isn’t guaranteed.Some White House officials have questioned what will happen if the Supreme Court declines to take up the case, but the overall sentiment from top legal advisers is that the administration is well-positioned to win the case and it’s not time to be concerned yet, according to a person familiar with the matter.If Trump secures a victory, construction could continue on a project whose completion he’s estimated by summer 2028, a few months before the end of his second term.It’s also possible that the court finds Trump must secure congressional approval before the project can resume, which would set up a major political test for the president’s party. Approval would become especially unlikely if Democrats gain power of either chamber in the November midterms.And public opinion isn’t on the president’s side: In a recent CNN poll, 58% of Americans said they were dissatisfied or angry about Trump’s projects around DC, like the ballroom and renovations at the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.Trump began messaging the ballroom as a national security necessity in late February. He zeroed in on that message after Friday’s ruling, saying it’s “being built for the protection of our Country and, additionally, all future Presidents” and highlighting some of the features of the underground bunker, including bomb shelters, medical facilities and top-secret military facilities.But the appeals court said Trump could continue work on the below-ground complex even while construction of the above-ground ballroom is paused, with the judges noting that the president could, for example, “put a fully protective covering over the underground construction and other exposed portions of the construction site” to ensure the bunker isn’t unprotected.Experts suggested to CNN that even if ballroom construction is legally forced to come to a halt, work on the bunker could proceed to eliminate the national security threat Trump has warned exists and also shore up the hole from any health and safety hazards.“Hypothetically, if you stop construction now, you could redesign this and have an underground facility and reconstruct the East Wing on top of it and just close off the site. There are other alternatives beyond completing the ballroom,” said Bryan Clark Green, an architectural historian who previously served on the National Capital Planning Commission, one of the review boards that approved the ballroom in April after being stacked with Trump loyalists.Trump’s construction obsessionTrump, a former real estate developer, has made construction his second job as president — one he believes is part of his legacy, sources familiar with his thinking have said.“The thing I do best in life is build,” he told reporters during a May field trip to observe the ballroom construction.The president lashed out at the appeals court repeatedly on Friday, underscoring the personal stakes as he cast the ruling as “a National Disgrace” and “horrendous, politically motivated, and unlawful.”But in Friday’s majority opinion, DC Circuit Court Judges Patricia Millett, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, and Brad Garcia, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, placed the blame squarely on Trump.“Any risk caused by the construction project and its multi-year timetable is overwhelmingly a problem of the Defendants’ own creation,” they wrote.The judges continued: “The Defendants unilaterally and likely without lawful authority destroyed a large portion of the White House structure and dug an open pit in its place. Then, after commencing a lengthy construction project, they publicly announced to the world the vulnerabilities that self-chosen endeavor has created.”The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Read Next Story