Ms. Lin began challenging the state's plan in recent months to increase racial and ethnic diversity across a variety of professions, from teaching to agriculture to podiatry.6 is one of the plaintiffs. Their lawsuit threatens to set back government affirmative action programs and the corporate world's diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts since the U.S. Supreme Court struck down race-based college admissions last year. It has become the latest front in a conservative movement to
Legal experts say this is partly because nearly every state and local government has at least one program that benefits women, minorities, and other underrepresented groups; says it is an easy target. These typically offer financial benefits such as rebates to Oregon teachers and greater opportunities to exercise power on government boards and commissions. But now their legal legitimacy – the claim that the government has a “compelling interest” to correct past or ongoing discrimination – is undergoing a fundamental reexamination in American society. .
A federal judge in Texas on Tuesday opened the federal agency created to help minority-owned businesses access capital and government contracts to everyone, including white business owners. I ordered. U.S. District Judge Mark T. Pittman, a Trump appointee, ruled that the government's reliance on broad racial categories to support these companies is unconstitutional.
Marcus AR. Childress, an attorney at Jenner & Block and a member of the firm's DEI Protection practice, said that if the court extends that logic to similar-style national programs, “Congress would not be able to “We may be forced to make fundamental changes, including re-evaluating how we achieve diversity,” he said. task force.
So far this year, lawsuits brought by white plaintiffs have been secured for minorities in Minnesota's subsidy system for women and minority farmers, the Louisiana Medical Board and the Alabama Real Estate Board. They are vying for seats and Oregon's teacher rebates available to Black people. , Hispanic, Asian, Native American, or non-native English speaking teachers.
“We're firing on all cylinders right now,” said Joshua P. Thompson, director of equality and opportunity litigation at the conservative public interest law firm Pacific Legal Foundation, which represents many plaintiffs, including Mr. Lin. I'm putting it in,” he said.
Linn's federal lawsuit, filed in February, seeks to end the Oregon program's preferential treatment for minority applicants and protects their 14th Amendment right to equal treatment under the law. claims to be infringing.
Lin said he is not necessarily opposed to efforts to foster a diverse environment, noting that about 30 percent of the district's students are Latino.
“But I think they're going about it the wrong way,” he said. “These things have to be done legally and ethically.”
Mr. Lin acknowledged that $192 was not an amount worth contesting. But that misses the larger point, which is that he works harder than anyone else to create a welcoming environment for newly arrived students from Latin America, regardless of their native language or skin color. That's true, he said.
Rebate program was created in 2019 Increase the diversity of K-12 teachers in the state. The 2022 State Report on Educator Diversity found that while the number of Hispanic students outnumbers the number of Hispanic teachers by nearly 3 to 1, the percentage of white teachers far exceeds the percentage of white students. It turned out that
“The Oregon Legislature seems to be very concerned about racial diversity in the classroom,” said Jenner & Block's Childress. “If it were to expire, states would be forced to reevaluate how they achieve their stated goals, such as having more diverse teachers in classrooms.”
The Oregon Attorney General's Office, which is defending the rebate program, did not respond to a request for comment.
The Supreme Court's decisions against Harvard University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, both concerning college admissions, set off a wave of lawsuits challenging DEI efforts in the private and public sectors. In addition to lawsuits targeting state programs, conservative legal groups are challenging many federal programs.
The Small Business Administration's 8(a) program for minority government contractors does not automatically consider black, Hispanic, Asian, or Native American business owners socially disadvantaged, a key requirement. The application process was overhauled last year after a court ruled the SBA could not. This week, the Minority Business Development Authority was similarly blocked from using racial categories to determine applicants' eligibility. Other cases, including one against a Department of Transportation program that sets aside $37 billion in contracts for minority businesses, could take years to be decided.
But most race-based government programs are run by states and cities, said Thompson of the Pacific Legal Foundation. A study released by his foundation in October found that 15 states have race- and gender-based mandates that apply to most public commissions. The study found that 63 professional licensure boards in social work, dentistry, pharmacy, and health testing in 14 states have similar requirements. Overall, at least 25 states have some form of such requirements, according to the report.
Thompson said he believes there is more.
“We haven’t just scratched the surface,” he said.
Joy Milligan, a former attorney with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund who now teaches at the University of Virginia, said courts have historically ruled against governments because society has an interest in redressing past and ongoing discrimination. He said he typically supported affirmative action programs.
Now, she says, while “the formal law hasn't really changed in a binding way,” “lower courts have changed these precedents in response to a far greater volume of challenges from conservative legal groups.” “They're becoming much more aggressive in chipping away at it.”
Milligan said several significant cases have followed this trend. A lawsuit won in 2021 challenged an SBA subsidy program for restaurants hit by pandemic lockdowns that gave preferential status to establishments owned by women, veterans, and minorities. And a judge halted a $4 billion debt relief program for Black farmers in June 2021.
Milligan said that while the Harvard and UNC decisions have little direct impact on race-conscious government programs, they do signal that the conservative legal movement has become very active. He said that it shows the “atmosphere and reality” of the film.
“They’re just thick on the ground,” Milligan said. “Colorblindness and attacks on affirmative action have been the premise of the conservative movement since the '70s, and everything is just going well for them.”
Lance Nissler, a white Minnesota farmer, sued the state in January over the farm down payment subsidy program. He claims his application was denied because he is not a woman or a minority, a violation of his 14th Amendment rights, and seeks to stop the program from using such preferences.
Launched in 2023, the program awards $15,000 grants to farmers making less than $250,000 a year. But with too few grants going to underrepresented groups, the program currently supports women, veterans, people with disabilities, American Indians, members of communities of color, agricultural workers under 35, Priority is given to “emerging farmers,” defined as farmers and agricultural workers. Other groups also participated, according to a recent state report.
Nissler argues that such a distinction is neither fair nor legitimate. He said he is filing this lawsuit to “give all Minnesotans a fair chance at grant programs that make a difference.” Thompson, who represents the Nissler Foundation, said the case is one of many that could change the law allowing race-based programs.
Thompson said the goal is to “win win after win, win after win” until at least one of these cases reaches the conservative supermajority Supreme Court.
it is “NAACP Strategy [Brown v. Board of Education] We will take it to the Supreme Court,'' he said, referring to the landmark 1954 decision that forced the integration of America's public schools. “This is a public interest litigation strategy and I think we should follow it.”
Pacific Law Foundation is just one of several public interest law firms and think tanks seeking to undermine programs based on racial preferences. Although the foundation focuses primarily on state programs, the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty has several pending lawsuits against long-running federal programs. Meanwhile, the National Center for Public Policy Research and America First Legal, a nonprofit led by former President Trump adviser Stephen Miller, have launched a fight with corporate boards and the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Edward Blum, a leading figure in college admissions litigation, is leading a high-profile challenge to an Atlanta-based venture capital firm that caters to black women. And just last month, Blum's Equal Rights Alliance sued the Smithsonian's National Museum of American Latinos, accusing its internship program of “pro-Latino discrimination.”
Blum is currently working with the Pacific Legal Foundation to challenge the requirement that Alabama's governor appoint at least two minorities to the state's Board of Real Estate Appraisers. In a statement to the Washington Post, Blum suggested the case could be an important new front in the fight against affirmative action.
“An individual's race or ethnicity should not be a factor in serving on a public commission,” Bloom said, adding that his coalition would “adjust racial assignments for public commissions in other states as appropriate.” “We will take part in the challenge,” he added.
