Today, the ACR Project alerted the House and Senate to the clear unconstitutionality of programs they should defund and repeal. ACR Project Chairman Gail Heriot, E.D. Dan Morenoff, and Director Peter Kirsanow signed the letters, which you can read, below. They concern the Minority Serving Institutions ("MSI") programs and their approximately billion dollars in annual funding.
On February 18th, two U.S. Civil Rights Commissioners (and ACR Project Directors) proposed an improvement to the Higher Education Act.
The ACR Project, FASORP, WILL, and CEO file wide-sweeping Title VII Charge Against the ABA. The ACR Project and WILL anticipate that the EEOC will take corrective action. Should it not do so, the ACR Project anticipates taking further action on behalf of FASORP to bring the ABA into compliance with American nondiscrimination law.
The ACR Project, through its Ohio co-counsel, Ben Flowers of Ashbrook Byrne Kresge Flowers, today alerted Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost that, despite A.G. Yost’s prior directives, a pair of Ohio’s public universities systematically violate the U.S. Constitution and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act through their administration of racially exclusive scholarships.
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.
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.
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.
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.
California Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed a bill that we warned would delegate wide-sweeping, binding power to an office that did not exist.
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.
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.