Blog

ACR Project Files Amicus Brief supporting Tennessee in U.S. v. Skrmetti

In U.S. v. Skrmetti, the Biden Administration would have the Court declare that the Equal Protection Clause prevents states from protecting children from potentially harmful medical interventions, when those interventions are related to children’s purported “gender identities.” In the brief we filed today, we explain that this is wrong, regardless of what the Court decides a potentially ephemeral “gender identity” at odds with one’s biological sex legally is and–as a result of the answer to that question–the level of scrutiny it applies to this statutory challenge based on it.

2024-10-15T15:54:31-05:00October 15th, 2024|Blog, Filings and Cases|

ACR Project Notifies Sacramento County and California Department of Social Services of Intent to Sue to Block Racially Exclusive Family First Economic Support Pilot

Once more, a California jurisdiction, underwritten by the state, has announced the pending launch of a racially exclusive basic minimum income program.  Once more, we have warned them that it clearly violates (at least) the U.S. Constitution, the California Constitution, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

2024-10-09T14:15:08-05:00October 9th, 2024|Blog, Submissions|

ACR Project Files Amicus Brief with En Banc 11th Circuit on Inapplicability of Title VII to Decision by Employer Providing Health Insurance Not Covering Any Psychologically-Driven Surgical Treatments for Body Dysmorphia to Also Not Cover “Sex Change” Surgeries

The ACR Project asked the en banc 11th Circuit to reverse a rogue opinion faulting an employer providing health insurance that does not cover any psychologically-driven surgical treatments for body dysmorphia for also failing to have that same insurance cover "sex change" surgeries.

2024-10-09T13:56:38-05:00October 9th, 2024|Blog, Filings and Cases|

ACR Project Files Amicus Briefs with Fifth and Eleventh Circuits, Supporting State Challenges to Biden Administration’s Re-Writing of Title IX

More-than-half the states have gone 8/8 in their challenges to the Administration's regulations re-writing Title IX. The Administration has appealed the resulting injunctions.  As those appeals move forward across the various circuits, the ACR Project continues to answer the bell, now submitting amicus briefs supporting the states in the litigation at the Fifth and Eleventh Circuits.

2024-10-09T11:32:25-05:00October 9th, 2024|Blog, Filings and Cases|

Racially Discriminatory Corporate Policies: Who’s Liable?

Laws banning discrimination have been on the books across America for more than a century and a half. Their prohibitions are among the most morally grounded, widely known, and widely supported in our law. Despite these facts, the last decade saw a cavalcade of corporations adopt policies that seemingly commit to violating these laws. While academics have spilled much ink considering whether such policies violate these laws, remarkably little attention has focused on whom they make liable for corporate violations. That omission masks a surprisingly under-appreciated near-consensus that American law makes individual decisionmakersliable for programmatic discrimination by the enterprises through which those decisionmakers discriminate. Officers and directors of major enterprises should bear this consensus in mind when considering the adoption, implementation, or retention of discriminatory policies.

2024-09-06T19:15:41-05:00September 6th, 2024|Blog|

California: One Big Step Forward, Four Small Steps Back

California's legislature seemingly just can't help itself. Even after quiet-killing yet another effort to amend the state's constitution to reauthorize racial discrimination, last week, Assembly committees sent to the floor bills to racially classify Californians and start awarding benefits to Californians based on those classifications.

2024-09-04T17:18:59-05:00August 21st, 2024|Blog, Submissions|
Go to Top