
Hooray! America is finally heading toward race and gender fairness
The latest good news: In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court said everyone deserves the same protection from discrimination, including straight white women and men.
In the decades since Martin Luther King Jr. called on us to judge people by the 'content of their character,' this country has moved in the opposite direction. Racial preferences, Diversity Equity and Inclusion programs and quotas favoring women, LGBTQ+ and other groups replaced judging each individual.
The average white guy or woman has been getting the shaft in corporate hiring, college admissions or even becoming a government supplier.
But now that is changing. Recent events, including the Trump administration's bold disavowal of DEI and discriminatory practices in hiring and promotion, and the high court ruling in Ames v. Ohio on Thursday, suggest America is not doomed to be a hopelessly divided caste society where group identity trumps an individual's essence.
We are starting to move in the right direction, where each individual can succeed on the merits. Marlean Ames' win on Thursday is another step forward.
Ames, a 61-year-old white heterosexual woman, sued the Ohio Department of Youth Services, where she'd worked for 16 years.
Despite getting favorable reviews and promotions, in 2020 she was turned down for a higher position that went to a lesbian, and then demoted, to be replaced by another gay man. She alleged discrimination based on her heterosexuality.
Lower federal courts rejected Ames' claim , saying because she is part of a majority group — heterosexual white women — she had a higher burden of proof than a minority would have.
But the justices ruled that having different standards for majority and minority groups violates Title VII, the portion of the landmark Civil Rights Act that outlawed workplace discrimination.
Ames still has to prove her case in the lower courts, but she will be treated the same as any minority group member alleging discrimination, not facing what Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson termed a 'heightened standard' of evidence.
The Supremes' ruling will reverberate in federal courts across America. In the Sixth Circuit and four other circuits, that double standard prevailed until now. Kudos to the top court for rejecting that two-tiered system of justice.
'Reverse' discrimination is as bad as any other kind. Proving it shouldn't be harder.
Amen.
We are in a new era that began with the Supreme Court's 2023 rulings striking down reverse discrimination at Harvard and the University of North Carolina.
After George Floyd's death in 2020, many companies launched ambitious efforts to diversify their workforces. Though well-intentioned, they caused resentment and violated the nation's bedrock principle of color-blind equality.
The justices' ruling against Harvard sent a signal to the corporate world to change course.
Credit also goes to politicians — including Donald J. Trump — consumers and even corporate shareholders who challenged DEI.
Major companies began rolling back their DEI programs. Lowe's was one of the first. Now the company says it wants to be a 'unifier.'
Citigroup reports it has dropped 'diversity, equity and inclusion' from the title of its talent management team.
Home Depot, Google, Goldman Sachs and many others have publicly scrapped hiring goals based on race, ethnicity, sex or gender.
It's a big change from the recent past, when a young white man graduating from college had to worry that internships and training programs at the big financial institutions and other corporate giants wouldn't consider him because of his race and gender.
But it's good news for everyone, not just him. The six decades of concocted preferences since Martin Luther King's famous 'content of their character' speech and the harm these preferences caused should teach us that treating people differently based on the group they belong to is a mistake.
Discrimination — no matter the group and however well-intentioned — inflicts new injustices.
As Ames said, 'We're trying to make this a level playing field for everyone. Not just a white woman in Ohio.'
It's also reassuring that the unanimous opinion in Ames was crafted by Justice Jackson, the most liberal member of the court and herself often considered a DEI pick.
It's another sign that America may be coming together on the need to end such distinctions altogether, whether invidious or virtuous in intent.
Betsy McCaughey is a former lieutenant governor of New York and co-founder of the Committee to Save Our City.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Newsweek
39 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Trump Admin Grapples With Supreme Court Dilemma on Birthright Citizenship
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Trump administration is seeking more time in federal court as it considers how to bring a challenge to birthright citizenship before the U.S. Supreme Court. In a consent motion filed on August 19 in the District of Maryland, government lawyers requested an additional 30 days to respond to an amended complaint in CASA Inc. v. Trump. The case contests executive order 14160, titled "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship." The order denies citizenship at birth when the mother is unlawfully present (or lawfully but temporarily present) and the father is not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident. Newsweek contacted the Department of Justice for comment by email outside regular working hours on Wednesday. Why It Matters The case goes to the core of the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause, which for more than a century has guaranteed citizenship to almost everyone born on U.S. soil. A successful challenge could affect hundreds of thousands of children born each year to undocumented parents, while also testing the limits of presidential power to redefine constitutional rights through executive orders. With the Trump administration signaling that it plans to seek a Supreme Court review, the litigation has the potential to reshape immigration law and the broader debate over American identity. What To Know The plaintiffs, a coalition of immigrant-rights organizations led by CASA, amended their complaint in June. On July 18, the government's deadline to respond was extended to August 22. The new motion seeks to push that date back to September 22. According to the filing, the delay is tied to the administration's broader legal strategy. The Justice Department acknowledged that multiple lawsuits were pending against the executive order across different jurisdictions. To resolve the matter more definitively, the solicitor general is preparing to ask the Supreme Court to take up the issue in its next term. "To that end, the Solicitor General of the United States plans to seek certiorari expeditiously to enable the Supreme Court to settle the lawfulness of the Executive Order next Term, but he has not yet determined which case or combination of cases to take to the Court," government attorneys wrote. The administration emphasized that the extension request was not an attempt to stall the proceedings. "This request is not made for purposes of delay, and no party will be prejudiced by the relief requested herein, particularly because Plaintiffs consent to the same," the motion said. On August 7, the court in Maryland granted a classwide preliminary injunction, applying nationwide to members of the certified class. Birthright citizenship newspaper headlines on the U.S. Constitution. Birthright citizenship newspaper headlines on the U.S. Constitution. iStock / Getty Images Plus Birthright Citizenship and the 14th Amendment Executive order 14160 has drawn criticism from immigrant advocacy groups, which argue that birthright citizenship is guaranteed under the 14th Amendment. The constitutional provision says, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." The administration, however, has contended that the clause does not extend to the children of undocumented immigrants. By moving toward a Supreme Court review, the administration appears to be seeking a definitive ruling on the scope of the citizenship clause. The outcome could have significant implications for immigration law and the legal status of U.S.-born children of noncitizen parents. What People Are Saying Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, criticizing the administration's approach in the Supreme Court, said on May 15: "Your argument … would turn our justice system into a 'catch me if you can' kind of regime, in which everybody has to have a lawyer and file a lawsuit in order for the government to stop violating people's rights." Justice Sonia Sotomayor, emphasizing constitutional precedent, added: "So, as far as I see it, this order violates four Supreme Court precedents." What Happens Next If the Trump administration's request for more time is approved, the government's deadline would move to September 22. For now, a nationwide injunction continues to block the order, leaving it unenforceable. Justice Department lawyers say they are considering which case to present to the Supreme Court for review in the next term, a move that could bring arguments before the justices in 2026. Both sides have agreed to the extension, and the government emphasized that no party would be harmed by the delay. While the extension keeps the litigation on hold, the broader fight over birthright citizenship is poised to escalate. On June 27, the court ruled on nationwide injunctions in Trump v. CASA but did not decide the merits of birthright citizenship. The administration now plans to seek a full review next term on the lawfulness of the executive order itself. If the court grants the review, it will put the question of the core citizenship clause before the justices in a way not seen since United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898).


Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Trump's border wall gets hot new upgrade and more top headlines
1. Trump's border wall gets hot new upgrade 2. Hot mic moment between Trump and Macron 3. Blue state AG warns police they'll 'regret' arresting her in viral video ON ALERT – Hurricane Erin unleashes massive waves, extreme coastal impacts along East Coast. Continue reading … PRIVILEGE REVOKED – Former Obama officials stripped of clearances as Gabbard exposes 'betrayal.' Continue reading … HIGH TENSION – Bryan Kohberger prosecutor breaks silence on key hearing that crushed killer's defense. Continue reading … PREDATOR PATTERN – Blue city rattled as alleged serial attacker preys on women in ritzy neighborhood. Continue reading … WOKE OVERREACH – Parents outraged as school punishes boys over trans locker room confrontation. Continue reading … -- SHORT AND SWEET – The Supreme Court's 'most interesting justice' leaves crowd puzzled after brief remarks. Continue reading … COURT COSTS – Preemptively pardoned Schiff launches legal defense fund under Trump admin. Continue reading … NEXT STEPS – Republicans and Democrats battle over House seats before 2026 midterms. Continue reading … RADICAL SHUTDOWN – 'Far Left agitators' boo Trump's House GOP ally offstage at event. Continue reading … DEI TARGET – White CBS anchor claims she was demoted due to diversity quotas lawsuit. Continue reading … RETURN TO SENDER – 'The View' co-host mocks first lady's peace plea to Putin. Continue reading … CREATURE CONSPIRACY – Red-eyed monster that 'kept pace with car going 100 mph' haunts small town. Continue reading … CALIFORNIA LEAVIN' – Pastor warns families to flee state if Newsom signs 'dangerous' bill. Continue reading … BILLY MCLAUGHLIN – I made memes for the White House. Here's what I learned. Continue reading … DAN GAINOR – Leftist MSNBC changes its name, but it's still the same embarrassment. Continue reading … -- TOXIC IMPORT – Radioactive material discovered in food sold at Walmart. Continue reading … SODA SWAP – Costco's Pepsi-to-Coke switch goes viral as members sound off. Continue reading … AMERICAN CULTURE QUIZ – Test yourself on vintage vehicles and carnival crowds. Take the quiz here … BURIED SPLENDOR – 1,700-year-old Roman bathhouse unearthed by archaeologists after surprise discovery. Continue reading … CALM DOWN – Brain expert reveals best advice for calming mind and body. See video … STEPHEN A. SMITH – Trump has done more than any administration to end world conflicts. See video … JAMES CARVILLE – Democrats need a presidential nominee. See video … Tune in to the FOX NEWS RUNDOWN PODCAST for today's in-depth reporting on the news that impacts you. Check it out ... What's it looking like in your neighborhood? Continue reading… Thank you for making us your first choice in the morning! We'll see you in your inbox first thing Thursday.


Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
Wu vs. Kraft tries to stay local in the Trump era
With less than a month to go before the preliminary election for mayor, incumbent Michelle Wu and challenger Joshua Kraft are starting to make their closing arguments to any Boston voters still listening. Why it matters: This mayor's race — Wu's first reelection campaign and a major test of her administration — has mostly been overshadowed by the rolling barrage of political news coming out of the White House. Between the lines: No one would claim the race has captured the rapt attention of Bostonians in 2025, who are more likely to tune into news about Harvard's struggles with the president or how the state economy will survive with reduced medical and life science research. The big picture: Kraft's campaign has consistently hammered Wu's style of City Hall leadership as out-of-touch and unwilling to hear feedback from residents, business owners and anyone else not already on the mayor's side. Playing defense hasn't been hard for Wu. Trump has made it a good year to be an experienced progressive in Massachusetts, especially when the alternative is an untested centrist and billionaire's son like Kraft. Zoom in: Both Kraft and Wu have campaigned on the biggest issue facing the city: affordability and our absurd cost of living. But much of the daily tit-for-tat between the candidates has been pettifogging over bike lanes, public drug use, campaign finances and not one, but two, soccer stadium projects. Reality check: Polls suggest Wu has a commanding lead, perhaps as much as a 60%-30% advantage over Kraft. The bottom line: The preliminary election results could shift things around. If Kraft outperforms expectations and lands within striking distance of Wu, it would re-energize his campaign and make the final two months of the race pivotal. What's next: Voters go to the polls Sept. 9 to narrow the field of four (two lesser-known contenders are also in the race) down to the top two.