With Manhattan Institute, the ACR Project filed an amicus brief at the Supreme Court. It asks the Justices to take a case and use it to free litigants from the standing trap (a pure catch-22) the Fourth Circuit has created to prevent challenges to racially discriminatory governmental presumptions.
For NAS and FASORP, the ACR Project filed to join Tennessee's challenge to the Hispanic Serving Institutions programs' discriminatory criteria.
Today we warned Auburn University and the Auburn University Foundation that their racially exclusive scholarships violate the U.S. Constitution and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, among other federal civil rights laws.
Sacramento County has settled our challenge to its so-called “guaranteed income” program that unlawfully chose beneficiaries based on race.
The ACR Project published a new Issue Guide--Fair Play: How the Law Protects Employees Disclosing Discrimination (Even the Fashionable "Woke" Kind) from Retaliation.
No Congress ever passed, no President ever signed, and as a result Title VII never contained (and does not contain now) any language outlawing employment policies bearing disparate impacts across demographic groups or imposing disparate-impact liability on employers for using such policies. Our entire 54-year foray since Griggs has been an unwarranted mistake, which has harmed American employment law and infected other areas with concepts incompatible with core constitutional commitments.
On May 21, 2025, the U.S. House Subcommittee on Higher Education & Workforce Development heard testimony from our ED Dan Morenoff at its second hearing on Restoring Excellence: the Case Against DEI. You can read his full written testimony here.
Despite clear state and federal law, Weber State remains "not shy about continuing to pursue the goal" of obtaining a particular racial balance. They should be. To help get them there, the ACR Project filed a Title VI complaint with DOJ and the U.S. Department of Education.
If the California Legislature is in session, some member is proposing the unconstitutional favoring of individuals based on ancestry. This session, that's again a winning bet (however the people of California must feel about that fact). Once more, Assemblymembers and Senators have proposed a whole slate of discriminatory bills (and one discriminatory state constitutional amendment). We've submitted letters to both chambers expressing concerns with the legality and constitutionality of a host of those proposals.
At least two cheers for the Ninth Circuit. Its opinion on the legality of states separating their school bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers by sex puts it (less thoroughly, but clearly) on the right side of the entrenched Circuit split over the correct reading of Title IX (effectively with the 11th Circuit, against the 4th and 7th Circuits).
The American Civil Rights Project, a public-interest law firm, seeks to assure that American law equally protects all Americans. The American Civil Rights Project is a tax-exempt, Texas non-profit under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.