Feb. 17, 2026

Richmond Free Press headquarters at 5th and Franklin Streets in Richmond, Va.  PHOTO: Julianne Tripp Hillian/Richmond Free Press

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - When the news began to spread that the Richmond Free Press was about to publish its last edition, the rumor blew like a cold wind through the Commonwealth of Virginia.

At a reception on Feb. 11, the eve of the official announcement, the buzz had already hit the streets, circulating among civil rights, business and political leaders.  Former Richmond Crusade for Voters President Sylvia Wood, former Metropolitan Business League President/CEO Lynda Sharp Anderson and former Virginia Gov. L. Douglas Wilder - all in attendance at a corporate reception Downtown - passionately expressed to this reporter their deep concern about rumors that, at 34 years old, the Black-owned newspaper was flailing.

The next morning, it officially hit: “The Richmond Free Press will cease publication this week, a bittersweet conclusion to a landmark publication that has served the Richmond community for 34 years,” said the Feb. 12 announcement on RichmondFreePress.com.

For some, the news stung. Gov. Abigail Spanberger led the painful way: “The closing of the Richmond Free Press is another major loss to those who value independent journalism and speaking truth to power. Thank you for your service to the Richmond community for more than three decades,” she wrote.

For me, well, it cut. It cut deeply like a death in the family. Actually, I’d gotten the call on the evening of Feb. 10 from Free Press Reporter George Copeland. He was asking for my reflections on the legacy of the Free Press. I was wondering…I thought it was an anniversary or something until he gave me the heart-rending news. The newspaper that I helped to birth in October 1991 by becoming its first reporter four months before its first issue hit the streets on January 16, 1992, was about to cease publishing.

As the story broke last week, the national award-winning publication – a renowned and acclaimed institution within the Virginia Black Press – quickly became known across the country as Free Press President and Publisher Jean Patterson Boone was invited to appear on Al Sharpton’s Politics Nation to discuss the newspaper’s saga and the plight of the Black Press. She recalled the decision to start the newspaper:

“We received many messages from Richmonders who cared and said we need your voice. We need you to come back to Richmond and help amplify the needs of Black people and people of good conscience. And so, after thinking about it and taking a deep breath, we decided to come back to Richmond,” Mrs. Boone told the story of how the legendary Free Press founder Ray Boone rose from the position of a highly respected editor of the Richmond Afro-American Newspaper, to a for the Baltimore Afro Chain to a distinguished professor at the Howard University School of Communications; then back to Richmond to start the Free Press in 1991.

“We stepped out on faith. And we worked very hard, very hard to make this paper the success that it has been until the Trump Administration had its way. And it has infiltrated the thinking and the decision-making by advertising agencies, by advertisers, by corporate leadership. It’s been a very difficult task to keep it going when you have the winds against you.”

Sharpton responded,  “This is part of the fall out of ending DEI (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion) and a lot of corporations cutting back on anything that looks like diversity. So, the result is advertising dollars freeze up.”

Sharpton pointed out that Mr. Boone founded the Free Press in Richmond, Va., which is the former capital of the Confederacy and one of the largest slave-trading hubs before the Civil War. Drawing from that legacy, Sharpton described Richmond as a city “still associated if not synonymous with racial tensions.”

I recall that hardened, entrenched mentality and our stories drawn from the fights against racism and White supremacy. Mr. Boone, who I had come to know as “my chief mentor and father in the Black Press”, was unwaveringly focused on justice. The Richmond Free Press was indeed what I have described as a Marine Boot Camp for journalists, focused on excellence in service by telling our stories and fighting our battles.

• Under his editorship, we broke the July 23, 1992 story that told how the Virginia Air National Guard had a Confederate Flag emblem emblazoned on its planes and uniforms since 1947, a tip given to us by a Black member of the air guard. The day that story was published, Gov. Wilder issued an executive order to have that emblem removed and replaced with the flag of the United States of America.
• We also broke the story that told how the Richmond Public Schools, with more than 90 percent Black students, had a staff of psychologists that were all White. Within weeks, the school system hired its first Black psychologist.
• And then there was the story of how Gilpin Court, Richmond’s largest and oldest public housing development, had for decades been plagued by a towering trash dump with rats, rodents and the smell of rotting refuse. The City Council had ignored the complaints of the residents until the Free Press published a series of stories, pushing them to clean it up. Our tenth story on the topic was that the council had finally seen the light. The dump was finally cleaned up and the people were contemplating making it a playground.

Story after story, the Richmond Free Press, from 1992 to its final addition on Feb. 12, 2026, fought for Black Richmonders, Black Virginians, Black Americans. Accolade after accolade, award after award, the applause for this publication – even beyond Mr. Boone’s death in 2014, still resonate in my mind as among the greatest contributions to humanity in the former Confederate capital.

That fight for justice, for freedom, for equality is not over. Mr. Boone made that clear to me before his death when he advised me to never think twice about what I should say or write when addressing issues in public. He said, “Tell the story of Black people because the story has not been told.”

Of the hundreds of Black-owned newspapers and Black-owned media agencies across the country, many are still struggling against the rabid racist regime of the Trump administration. We will continue to tell our story. As for the Richmond Free Press, Publisher Jean Patterson Boone, who took up the torch from her deceased husband and ran with it for nearly 12 years, leading talented editors, writers and dedicated staffers, including their first administrative employee Tracey Oliver and their children, award-winning photographer Regina, and circulation executive Raymond Jr., perhaps the proudest accomplishment was that despite the struggle, the quality of the newspaper never suffered - never.

“I was going to end on our terms; not on someone else’s terms,” Mrs. Boone told Rev. Sharpton. “I never missed a payroll. That was my thought and my intention and my promise. Though Ray never talked to me about continuing, he knew how difficult this is.” She concluded in a social media post, “Perhaps dear readers, we’ll meet again.”

Feb. 14, 2026

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Frederick Douglass did not know the day he was born.

Like many enslaved people, he was denied even the dignity of documentation. Birth dates were approximations. Family lines were severed. Identity existed in property ledgers, not in public record.

His mother, Harriet Bailey, called him her “little Valentine,” and Douglass later chose February 14 as his birthday — an act of self-definition in a country that refused to define him as fully human.

That act matters.

Douglass understood something fundamental: identity is not granted by paperwork. It is asserted through presence, voice, and participation. He claimed authorship over his own life in a nation structured to deny it.

Today, we are debating whether documentation should determine access to democracy.

The SAVE Act would require documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections. Passports. Birth certificates. Paper trails. Supporters frame it as administrative protection. But the history of American democracy teaches us that administrative mechanisms are rarely neutral.

Paperwork has always been political.

After Reconstruction, when Black political participation expanded, new rules narrowed the electorate. Literacy tests. Poll taxes. Grandfather clauses. Each was presented as procedural. Each functioned as a barrier.

The methods change. The objective — control over who counts — does not.

Documentation requirements would fall hardest on those least likely to have ready access to formal records: seniors born at home in the Jim Crow South, low-income Americans without passports, married women whose legal names no longer match their birth certificates. Even producing paperwork can become a test of belonging.

Documented cases of noncitizen voting are exceedingly rare. The question is not fraud prevention; it is access.

Reconstruction was not only about emancipation. It was about participation. Black men voted. Black officials were elected. Black institutions were built. And when those gains threatened entrenched power, backlash followed.

In 1898, in Wilmington, North Carolina, a legitimately elected multiracial government was overthrown. Black political power was dismantled. The ballot was replaced by the bullet. It was not disorder; it was organized suppression.

The lesson is sobering. When participation expands, resistance emerges.

Today’s debates unfold in legislative chambers rather than in armed mobs. But the question remains: who has the authority to define citizenship?

Douglass claimed his identity in a system that denied him documentation. He did not wait for official recognition to assert his humanity. He understood that democracy depends not on perfect records, but on inclusive participation.

When paperwork becomes a prerequisite for political voice, we should ask whether we are strengthening democracy — or narrowing it.

The struggle over the ballot has never been merely procedural. It has always been about power.

Douglass defined himself when the state would not.

Dr. Julianne Malveaux is a DC based economist and authorl. Subscribe ot her newsletter at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it." data-linkindex="0">This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..  Communicate with her at juliannemalveau

To Be Equal 
February 14, 2026

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - “If the federal government will not hold these rogue actors accountable, then Chicago will do everything in our power to bring these agents to justice.” – Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson

There comes a point when euphemisms fail us. What ICE has done in Chicago and Minneapolis is not mere “overreach.” Agents did not make “missteps” or “tactical errors.” These are clear, documented violations of the law and abuses of power that have endangered the lives of American citizens — and they demand a forceful reckoning. State and local leaders in Illinois and Minnesota have been forced into a role that should shame the federal government: they are defending the Constitution against the very agents sworn to uphold it.

In Chicago, a federal judge confirmed what communities have been shouting for years: ICE repeatedly carried out warrantless arrests in violation of a court‑ordered consent decree, blatantly disregarding the most basic protections of the Fourth Amendment. These arrests were not accidents or technical mistakes — they were a pattern of unlawful detentions, carried out by an agency operating with impunity.

Chicago’s own leadership has described ICE’s conduct in the city as a series of actions that violated constitutionally protected rights, destabilized neighborhoods, and provoked life‑threatening confrontations. This is the language officials use when an agency behaves like a lawless paramilitary force, not a legitimate arm of the federal government.

In Minnesota, federal agents went even further — storming homes without warrants, conducting stops without legal justification, and seizing people who had no criminal records, including children and U.S. citizens. These are illegal acts, full stop. Legal analyses make clear that ICE simply ignored the limits of its own authority.

And then came the deaths. Renee Good. Alex Pretti. Both killed by ICE agents in Minneapolis — killings that shocked the conscience of the nation and ignited statewide protests. These tragedies did not occur in isolation; they happened amid an operation so sweeping and unrestrained that Minnesota’s own governor called it an “occupation.”

Illinois Governor JB Pritzker saw Operation Midway Blitz for what it was: an unannounced, militarized federal invasion of his state. He immediately began preparing legal action against the Trump administration for its reckless deployment of ICE and Border Patrol agents into Chicago communities.

But Pritzker didn’t stop at mere rhetoric — he backed one of the strongest state‑level countermeasures in modern immigration policy. House Bill 1312 would create “safe zones,” ban ICE from courthouse arrests, and allow residents to sue federal agents who violate their constitutional rights. This is a direct and unapologetic challenge to ICE’s culture of impunity.

Meanwhile, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz took the federal government head‑on, calling the ICE surge “a campaign of organized brutality” and demanding it end immediately. Walz publicly condemned the indiscriminate stops, the home invasions, and the terror inflicted on families — stating plainly that the operation had caused generational trauma, economic devastation, and profound civic harm.

These are not the words of timid officials. These are the words of leaders who know their people are under assault.

In Chicago, Mayor Brandon Johnson did what the federal government has refused to do: he moved to hold rogue federal agents criminally accountable. His “ICE On Notice” executive order requires Chicago police to document illegal ICE activity, secure body‑camera evidence, and report violations of state and local law. This order makes Chicago the first city in America to build infrastructure capable of prosecuting ICE and CBP agents for misconduct.

Johnson’s message is unambiguous: if the federal government will not restrain its own agents, Chicago will do it for them. He has also strengthened sanctuary protections and barred ICE from using city property as operational staging grounds — a direct counterstrike against Washington’s authoritarian overreach.

In Minneapolis, Mayor Jacob Frey has been just as explicit, calling for a nationwide end to the “ICE siege” and condemning the agency for transforming his city into the epicenter of an unconstitutional crackdown. Frey has repeatedly demanded the withdrawal of federal forces and highlighted the catastrophic impact of ICE’s actions on Minneapolis residents, including shuttered businesses, terrified families, and the deaths of two community members at ICE’s hands.

This is what constitutional leadership looks like.

Let’s be very clear: ICE did not enforce the law — it violated it. It terrorized communities, conducted illegal operations, and left death in its wake.

And when federal leadership refused to enforce accountability, it was state and local officials — Pritzker, Walz, Johnson, and Frey — who stood up in its place.

Their defiance is not radical. It is not partisan. It is not symbolic.

It is constitutional patriotism.

At a time when a federal agency behaves as if it is above the law, these leaders have reminded the country that:

• The Constitution still applies.
• States still have rights.
• Local governments still have a duty to protect their residents.
• And no federal badge grants immunity from the rule of law.

America needs more leaders willing to confront unlawful federal power with this level of clarity and courage. Because if ICE can trample constitutional rights in Chicago and Minneapolis today, it can do the same in any American city tomorrow.

And if that happens, we will depend — desperately — on leaders like Pritzker, Walz, Johnson, and Frey to stand firm once again.

• Reinstate all probationary and term employees terminated between February 10, 2025 and December 30, the date of this order, including but not limited to the Private Student Loan Ombudsman.
• No termination of any CFPB employee, except for cause related to the individual employee’s performance or conduct; nor issue any notice of reduction-in-force to any CFPB employee.
• Ensure that employees can perform their statutorily mandated functions, the defendants must provide them with either fully equipped office space, or permission to work remotely and laptop computers that are enabled to connect securely to the agency server.
• Ensure that the CFPB Office of Consumer Response continues to maintain a single, toll-free telephone number, a website, and a database for the centralized collection of consumer complaints regarding consumer financial products and services, and that it continues to monitor and respond to those complaints.
• Rescind all notices of contract termination issued on or after February 11, 2025, and they may not reinitiate the wholesale cancellation of contracts.