I don't think you are open to having your mind changed.
blacks are not the only ones to whom the government has broken promises. with the current year assault on the founding principles and very doctrine proclaiming is a nation at all, you're focused on a sour deal over a century ago ? I'm pretty sure your mind is already made up....

1. We don't bind the children for the errors of their parents.
2. An order of the President can not take from a State what belongs to it's citizens and redistribute it without compensation to those from whom the takings were made - that cost would be a 'net wash' I bet....
3. Less than a million blacks were brought to this country, if there is one that is still alive, give them what the Americans, out of their own pockets, through no effort of the government, give to that person (or people).
   3a) Wait you say, none of them are still alive? Ok, their children alive at the time. No? Too bad for the next generations because while we don't bind the children for their parents, we don't "reward" their descendants either.
4. Fortunately (yep, fortunately) this country does not operate according to Scripture. While it might inform the sensibilities of individuals, it does not form any basis in government.
5. Society changes, evolves, adapts. We can't go back and fix what was done AT THE TIME in keeping with the values THEN in place.
6. Scripture by the way has nothing bad to say about having slaves, so reliance on that would seem ...hypocritical at best.
7. And this one is for my benefit - my family didn't come to this country until 1956 (dad) 1958 (mom). I was born 2 months after my mom got here. Neither my parents, nor me or my sibs owe ANYTHING to blacks for what happened over 150 years ago. Further, while blacks certainly contributed to the economic growth of the United States, it was by far not the engine or backs it was built on. Go talk to the Irish and Chinese slaves that built buildings and railroads. Yes, in real numbers, both were less than blacks, but they DID exist - suggesting reparations are due only blacks is discrimination.

It is not just for me to pay for something neither I, nor my family did. Nor is it just to pay someone for something they were not harmed by. Like destroying property because 'slavery' is retroactive vigilantism, reparations are retroactive virtue signaling. Neither are 'just'.

My ancestors fought and died in the civil war to defend emancipation. Although I agree that a binding contract with the government was set and broken, it became unenforceable when none of the parties survived. Otherwise anyone with any claim of loss, at any time in history, even beyond the Civil War, could in principle have a valid claim, including my ancestors.

Similar to the immigration policy. Once upon a time, we asked how many were practical to invite, as a responsible host. We did not assume that 7 billion people could move to the US.

Our law is intended to provide equal opportunity, which means NO ONE is special. So elevating anyone above others is against the spirit of our law, even if harm has been done to them individually, especially when practically unenforceable.

I appreciate your distinction between personal culpability and the state's liability. I would support your proposals and agree that they are just and feasible if administratively challenging. I also think that our polarized politics would benefit from a truth and reconciliation process.

Ultimately, I think the most effective, easiest, and least divisive way of providing reparations is through social democracy. The Federal Reserve has become very good at keeping the financial system and large corporations capitalized. If there were the political will, perhaps we could make them provide the capital that people need to shape their lives, at least by easing the budgets of states and local governments whose pensions were left uninsured and unregulated when private ones were rescued by the federal government.

The legacy of slavery, Jim Crow, and redlining already ensures that African Americans have less capital. Bank consolidation and top heavy financing that redistributes ownership to private equity is increasing inequality for everyone else too. Minorities during the civil rights movement demanded programs like ethnic and gender studies in order to increase participation in the public sphere only for those programs to be devalued and public spending cut as the population grew. Ordinary people are increasingly well-educated but become slaves to debt because of those cuts and because they don't have the inheritances of past generations. Neoliberals are uninterested in reversing the trend, but Stephanie Kelton, an MMT economist, recently wrote a book about the policies that could change this called "The Deficit Myth."