The article talks specifically for California's sins related to Black slaves descendants -- using terminology in the article. I am also a bit confused. I had t

The article talks specifically for California's sins related to Black slaves descendants -- using terminology in the article. I am also a bit confused. I had the impression that California never allowed slaves. I found this https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/historic-california-law-establishes-path-reparations-black-people-descendants-slaves-n1241627 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/historic-california-law... "California was founded as a free state, or a state where slavery was illegal, in 1850, yet several laws made significant allowances for residents to retain enslaved people so long as they lived in California temporarily or bought the slaves before statehood." But I don't see any specific legal references. And even then the article on the decision of the task force is hand wavy at best. So there were loopholes, but what is the extent and do the descendants have to somehow prove their ancestors lived in California? I mean thumbs up, but yeah, my ancestors were slaves and had to fight for their freedom, so where does California stand on that by this reasoning?