Posted on 06/04/2024 6:47:48 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
NEW YORK (AP) — A U.S. federal court of appeals panel suspended a venture capital firm’s grant program for Black women business owners, ruling that a conservative group is likely to prevail in its lawsuit claiming that the program is discriminatory.
The ruling against the Atlanta-based Fearless Fund is another victory for conservative groups waging a sprawling legal battle against corporate diversity programs that have targeted dozens of companies and government institutions.
The case against the Fearless Fund was brought last year by the American American Alliance for Equal Rights, a group led by Edward Blum, the conservative activist behind the Supreme Court case that ended affirmative action in college admissions.
Blum applauded the ruling, saying “programs that exclude certain individuals because of their race such as the ones the Fearless Fund has designed and implemented are unjust and polarizing.”
Fearless Fund CEO and Founder Arian Simone said the ruling was “devastating” for the organizations and the women it has invested in.
“The message these judges sent today is that diversity in Corporate America, education, or anywhere else should not exist,” she said in statement. “These judges bought what a small group of white men were selling.”
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.com ...
Special treatment is NOT equal treatment. Could just be me.....
LOL!
Discrimination is either illegal or it is not; you cannot pick and choose.
Special treatment based on skin color and sex is actually discriminatory.
How could it not be?
Or is it the dems message to non whites that without them they are incapable of accomplishing anything.
I’m a bit confused, if it’s a private company and it’s their money, why can’t they do what they want with it?
“These judges bought what a small group of white men were selling.”
How is this different than senior discounts and ladies night drinks half off?
>Discrimination is either illegal or it is not; you cannot pick and choose.
Disagree.
Discrimination via GOVT == no no
By the Individual == perfectly acceptable/legal (where {X} wishes to eat/shop+, for reason {Y}).
Capitalizing “black” Is discriminatory so I won’t read the article.
>Special treatment based on skin color and sex is actually discriminatory.
...& sex/rac-ist.
Obviously I was referring to the former.
Good.
Now run the ENTIRE Federal Procurement system through that ruling.
“Diversity” is nothing more than discrimination against whites and men -as this case shows.
Next up - Federal hiring preferences. +5 for minority and +5 for female is effectively -10 for white males.
A venture capital fund dare not discriminate. That’s the realm of government to do that.
Hooray!
Perhaps at issue is that the Fearless Fund is a tax-deductible 501(c)3 and doing discrimination? I dunno if that's part of the legality on their discrimination being ruled illegal.
I though der kleine Führer Georgi Soros was the patron Sugar Daddy for overweight “Black” women.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.