Latest news with #CivilRightsDivision
Boston Globe
2 days ago
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Discrimination cases unravel as Trump scraps core civil rights tenet
The Justice Department now is reviewing its entire docket and has already dismissed or terminated 'many' cases that were 'legally unsupportable' and a product of 'weaponization' under the Biden administration, said Harmeet Dhillon, who heads the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'We will fully enforce civil rights laws in a way that satisfies the ends of justice, not politicization,' she said in a statement to The Washington Post. Advertisement The review includes cases and reform agreements forged after years-long investigations that the administration says lacked justification. Civil rights experts estimate that dozens of discrimination cases involving banks, landlords, private employers, and school districts could face similar action. 'What we're seeing is an attempt by the Trump administration to really dismantle a lot of the core tools that we use to ensure equality in the country,' said Amalea Smirniotopoulos, senior policy counsel and comanager of the Equal Protection Initiative at the Legal Defense Fund, a nonprofit that has long advocated for the civil rights of Black Americans and other minorities. Advertisement At the center of this effort is 'disparate impact analysis,' which holds that neutral policies can have discriminatory outcomes even if there was no intent to discriminate. The legal standard stems from Griggs v. Duke Power, the landmark 1971 Supreme Court decision that became a staple of civil rights litigation. In that case, attorneys relied on statistical evidence to show how standardized testing prevented Black employees in North Carolina from advancing at the energy company. The legal theory has been consistently recognized by the Supreme Court, written into federal regulations and enshrined into employment law by Congress. But President Trump declared it unconstitutional in April, issuing an executive order that kicked off an intense review of civil rights regulations, enforcement actions, and settled cases. Now, government agreements and orders that relied on disparate impact in pursuing sex, race, and disability discrimination cases are being undone. On May 23, for example, the Justice Department terminated an agreement with Patriot Bank, a Tennessee-based lender accused of failing to lend in predominantly Black and Latino neighborhoods in Memphis, from 2015 to 2020. Prosecutors used statistical evidence to show disparities in the bank's lending practices alongside evidence of intentional discrimination, such as targeting most of its advertising in majority-white neighborhoods. A three-year agreement to reform its lending practices had been in place for a little over a year before Trump's Justice Department moved to end it, noting the bank was in compliance with the reform agreement. Patriot declined to comment. Civil rights advocates worry about the future of similar enforcement. Advertisement Disparate impact has long been anathema to conservatives, who say it can result in quotas and deny equal opportunity to white people. But past Republican administrations opted not to take this issue on, partly because of Supreme Court precedent and partly because it might prove politically unpopular. 'What changed is just political will,' said Kenneth L. Marcus, who headed the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights during both George W. Bush's administration and Trump's first term. 'The second Trump administration is more willing to take on potentially contentious civil rights issues than any Republican administration this century.' Trump issued a slew of executive orders to eradicate diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, programs - calling them 'illegal and immoral' days after he returned to the White House in January - and ordered the government to close diversity offices and fire staff. His administration has since launched investigations into corporations, law firms and colleges over their diversity initiatives, while going to battle with Harvard University for its refusal to comply with a set of demands to alter its governance, admissions, and hiring practices. When Trump set his sights on disparate impact in April, he called it a 'pernicious movement' that ignores 'individual strengths, effort or achievement.' He ordered federal agencies to review any cases and reform agreements that rely on the theory - and terminate them as they see fit. The actions are long overdue, said Dan Morenoff, executive director at the American Civil Rights Project, a nonprofit law firm that opposes the use of disparate impact and diversity initiatives. He contends that the government's use of disparate impact has been, in many cases, legally dubious, adding that its assumptions are fundamentally flawed. Advertisement 'The people who most appreciate disparate impact appear, usually, to be deeply wed to the idea that any discrepancies are best explained by discrimination,' he said. The Supreme Court most recently upheld the use of disparate impact analysis in a 2015 housing case. But that decision was decided on a 5-4 vote in an opinion written by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, now retired. Some conservatives believe the court's current conservative supermajority might give them their wished-for outcome. 'It's clear what the Trump administration is aiming for is to get this question to the Supreme Court in hopes the Supreme Court will take that tool away,' said Smirniotopoulos of the Legal Defense Fund. The rollbacks are already underway. In 2023, the Justice Department alleged that Atlanta-based Ameris Bank avoided providing home loans to Black and Latino home buyers in Jacksonville, Florida, in a practice known as redlining. The bank almost exclusively advertised in majority-White neighborhoods and made little effort to do business in majority Black and Latino neighborhoods, according to its lawsuit. Only 2.7 percent of Ameris's mortgages went to borrowers in Black and Latino communities from 2016 to 2021, the complaint said, while its competitors issued more than three times as many loans during that window. Ameris knew about the disparities but failed to correct them, the government alleged. Though it admitted no wrongdoing, Ameris quickly settled the case, agreeing to a set of measures whose progress would be monitored by the court. Then, on May 19, the Justice Department moved to unwind the settlement, saying that the bank has 'demonstrated a commitment to remediation' while freeing it from its legal obligations to implement the reforms. The bank did not object to the move. Prosecutors did note that Ameris had disbursed the entirety of a $7.5 million loan subsidy fund for borrowers in Black and Latino neighborhoods. Advertisement A judge granted the request a day later. Ameris declined to comment. The government moved to terminate cases involving two banks in Alabama and Tennessee that had agreed to court-monitored reforms tied to allegations of discriminatory lending practices. It also moved to dismiss a case in Kinloch, Mo., against property managers accused of refusing to rent to prospective Black tenants at disproportionate rates. There are at least eight other housing and lending cases across seven states that are similarly candidates for dismissal, according to a review. While the administration blamed the Biden administration for mishandling these cases, it has also dismissed cases going back decades. It did not directly concern disparate impact, but the Justice Department in April dismissed a 1966 consent order with a Louisiana school district concerning its desegregation efforts.
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Chicago alderman slams mayor's hiring practices as 'giant leap in the wrong direction' amid DOJ probe
A Chicago alderman says the city is taking a "giant leap in the wrong direction" after the Department of Justice announced it is investigating Mayor Brandon Johnson's hiring practices. During a May 18 service at the Apostolic Church of God, Johnson responded to people who claimed he only talked about hiring Black people. "No, what I'm saying is, when you hire our people, we always look out for everybody else. We are the most generous people on the planet," he said. "I'm laying that out because when you ask, 'How do we ensure that our people get a chance to grow their business,' having people in my administration that will look out for the interests of everyone, and everyone means you have to look out for the interests of Black folks." Johnson mentioned top officials who serve in his administration and emphasized their race. One example included his deputy mayor of business and economic development, a Black woman. Doj Launches Investigation Into Blue State City Over Alleged Race-based Hiring After his remarks, Harmeet K. Dhillon, the assistant attorney general for the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division, notified Johnson his administration is being investigated to see if it utilizes discriminatory hiring practices. Read On The Fox News App "Considering these remarks, I have authorized an investigation to determine whether the City of Chicago is engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination as set forth above. If these kind of hiring decisions are being made for top-level positions in your administration, then it begs the question whether such decisions are also being made for lower-level positions," Dhillon said. Chicago Alderman Raymond Lopez told Fox News Digital he's glad the DOJ is looking into the Johnson administration's hiring practices, saying he thinks many Chicagoans have the same concern. Chicago's Mayor Johnson Is So Focused On Race He Can't See The Truth About Humanity "I am glad that they are looking into it. I think it validates the concerns that many Chicagoans have had that Brandon Johnson is a mayor, not for the entire city, but for only one demographic," Lopez said. "There are tens of thousands of individuals who work for the city of Chicago who feel as though they have been left out of promotions, left out of advancement or even left out from being hired as a whole even on the front line. And I think that needs to be looked into by the Department of Justice." Lopez said he thinks the city is taking steps in the wrong direction in the way it hires. "This is just one sad step backwards for the City of Chicago to have the mayor articulate so passionately that he prefers to hire one ethnic demographic at the expense of all others. It doesn't make sense to me how, in the 21st century, we've done so much to try to move beyond seeing each other just solely based on race, that we are now taking a giant leap in the wrong direction," he said. The alderman said there are Black Chicago residents he talks to who disagree with Johnson when it comes to hiring decisions. "Let me be 100%, 110% clear on this note. There are African Americans who don't like that statement either. There are many well-qualified leaders of departments who put blood, sweat and tears into lifting up Chicago, who now have been trivialized by his comments and are viewed through a lens of they're just here because they're Black," Lopez added. In comments made after the DOJ launched its investigation, Johnson said it came from a place of fear. "You can tell when someone is fearful is because they act out," Johnson said. "We have a president that is screaming and having tantrums right now because we have an administration that reflects the city of Chicago, but he would much rather have administrations that reflect the country club. Period." Fox News Digital reached out to Johnson for comment. Fox News' Greg Wehner contributed to this article source: Chicago alderman slams mayor's hiring practices as 'giant leap in the wrong direction' amid DOJ probe
The Hindu
7 days ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Trump administration sues North Carolina over its voter registration records
The U.S. Trump administration accused North Carolina's election board on Tuesday (May 27, 2025) of violating federal law by failing to ensure voter registration records of some applicants contained identifying numbers. The Justice Department sued in federal court also asking a judge to force board officials to create a prompt method to obtain such numbers. The department alleges that the State and the board aren't complying with the 2002 Help America Vote Act after board officials provided a statewide voter registration form that didn't make clear that an applicant must provide either a driver's license number or the last four digits of a Social Security number. If an applicant lacks neither, the State must assign the person another unique number. A previous edition of the State board, in which Democrats held a majority, acknowledged the problem in late 2023 after a voter complained. The board updated the form but declined to contact people who had registered to vote since 2004 in time for the 2024 elections so they could fill in the missing numbers. According to the lawsuit, the board indicated that such information would be accumulated on an ad hoc basis as voters appeared at polling places. It's unclear exactly how many voters' records still lack identifying numbers. Lawyers from the department's Civil Rights Division contend the board must act more aggressively. They want a judge to give the State 30 days to develop a plan to contact voters with records that don't comply with federal law, obtain an identifying number for each and add that to the electronic list. The litigation follows similar efforts by the Republican Party and a State GOP candidate to address the registration records for the 2024 election. The lawsuit also referred to President Donald Trump's broad executive order on elections in March to 'guard against illegal voting, unlawful discrimination, and other forms of fraud, error, or suspicion'. 'Accurate voter registration rolls are critical to ensure that elections in North Carolina are conducted fairly, accurately, and without fraud,' Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said in a press release. 'The Department of Justice will not hesitate to file suit against jurisdictions that maintain inaccurate voter registration rolls in violation of federal voting laws.' This month, the board's composition changed to reflect a 2024 law approved by the GOP-dominated General Assembly that shifted the board's appointment powers from the now-Democratic governor to Republican State Auditor Dave Boliek. A previous 3-2 Democratic majority is now a 3-2 Republican majority. The new iteration of the board sounds open to embrace the Justice Department's wishes. Executive Director Sam Hayes said late Tuesday the lawsuit was being reviewed, 'but the failure to collect the information required by HAVA has been well documented. Rest assured that I am committed to bringing North Carolina into compliance with federal law'. Local elections start in September. The state and national GOP last year sued over the lack of identifying numbers, which they estimated could have affected 225,000 registrants. But federal judges declined to make changes so close to the general election. The issue also was litigated after Election Day as part of formal protests filed by the Republican candidate for a seat on the state Supreme Court who challenged about 60,000 ballots he contended were cast by registrants whose records failed to contain one of the two identifying numbers. The election board said earlier this year at least roughly half of those voters actually did provide an identifying number. State appeals courts criticised the board's handling of the registration records but ultimately ruled the challenged ballots had to remain in the final election tally. Democratic Associate Justice Allison Riggs defeated Republican challenger Jefferson Griffin by 734 votes out of over 5.5 million ballots cast.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
7 days ago
- Politics
- Business Standard
Trump admin sues North Carolina over its voter registration records
The Trump administration accused North Carolina's election board on Tuesday of violating federal law by failing to ensure voter registration records of some applicants contained identifying numbers. The Justice Department sued in federal court also asking a judge to force board officials to create a prompt method to obtain such numbers. The department alleges that the state and the board aren't complying with the 2002 Help America Vote Act after board officials provided a statewide voter registration form that didn't make clear an applicant must provide either a driver's license number or the last four digits of a Social Security number. If an applicant lacks neither, the state must assign the person another unique number. A previous edition of the state board, in which Democrats held a majority, acknowledged the problem in late 2023 after a voter complained. The board updated the form but declined to contact people who had registered to vote since 2004 in time for the 2024 elections so they could fill in the missing numbers. According to the lawsuit, the board indicated that such information would be accumulated on an ad hoc basis as voters appeared at polling places. It's unclear exactly how many voters' records still lack identifying numbers. Lawyers from the department's Civil Rights Division contend the board must act more aggressively. They want a judge to give the state 30 days to develop a plan to contact voters with records that don't comply with federal law, obtain an identifying number for each and add that to the electronic list. The litigation follows similar efforts by the Republican Party and a state GOP candidate to address the registration records for the 2024 election. The lawsuit also referred to President Donald Trump's broad executive order on elections in March to guard against illegal voting, unlawful discrimination, and other forms of fraud, error, or suspicion. Accurate voter registration rolls are critical to ensure that elections in North Carolina are conducted fairly, accurately, and without fraud, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said in a press release. The Department of Justice will not hesitate to file suit against jurisdictions that maintain inaccurate voter registration rolls in violation of federal voting laws. This month, the board's composition changed to reflect a 2024 law approved by the GOP-dominated General Assembly that shifted the board's appointment powers from the now-Democratic governor to Republican State Auditor Dave Boliek. A previous 3-2 Democratic majority is now a 3-2 Republican majority. The new iteration of the board sounds open to embrace the Justice Department's wishes. Executive Director Sam Hayes said late Tuesday the lawsuit was being reviewed, but the failure to collect the information required by HAVA has been well documented. Rest assured that I am committed to bringing North Carolina into compliance with federal law. Local elections start in September. The state and national GOP last year sued over the lack of identifying numbers, which they estimated could have affected 225,000 registrants. But federal judges declined to make changes so close to the general election. The issue also was litigated after Election Day as part of formal protests filed by the Republican candidate for a seat on the state Supreme Court who challenged about 60,000 ballots he contended were cast by registrants whose records failed to contain one of the two identifying numbers. The election board said earlier this year at least roughly half of those voters actually did provide an identifying number. State appeals courts criticized the board's handling of the registration records but ultimately ruled the challenged ballots had to remain in the final election tally. Democratic Associate Justice Allison Riggs defeated Republican challenger Jefferson Griffin by 734 votes out of over 5.5 million ballots cast. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
San Francisco Chronicle
7 days ago
- Politics
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump administration sues North Carolina over its voter registration records
RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — The Trump administration accused North Carolina's election board on Tuesday of violating federal law by failing to ensure voter registration records of some applicants contained identifying numbers. The Justice Department sued in federal court also asking a judge to force board officials to create a prompt method to obtain such numbers. The department alleges that the state and the board aren't complying with the 2003 Help America Vote Act after board officials provided a statewide voter registration form that didn't make clear an applicant must provide either a driver's license number or the last four digits of a Social Security number. If an applicant lacks neither, the state must assign the person another unique number. A previous edition of the state board, in which Democrats held a majority, acknowledged the problem in late 2023 after some voters complained. The board updated the form but declined to contact people who had registered to vote since 2004 in time for the 2024 elections so they could fill in the missing numbers. According to the lawsuit, the board indicated that such information would be accumulated on an ad hoc basis as voters appeared at polling places. It's unclear exactly how many voters' records still lack identifying numbers. Lawyers from the department's Civil Rights Division contend the board must act more aggressively. They want a judge to give the state 30 days to contact voters with records that don't comply with federal law, obtain an identifying number for each and add that to the electronic list. The litigation follows similar efforts by the Republican Party and a state GOP candidate to address the registration records for the 2024 election. The lawsuit also referred to President Donald Trump's broad executive order on elections in March to 'guard against illegal voting, unlawful discrimination, and other forms of fraud, error, or suspicion.' 'Accurate voter registration rolls are critical to ensure that elections in North Carolina are conducted fairly, accurately, and without fraud,' Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said in a news release. 'The Department of Justice will not hesitate to file suit against jurisdictions that maintain inaccurate voter registration rolls in violation of federal voting laws.' This month, the board's composition changed to reflect a 2024 law approved by the GOP-dominated General Assembly that shifted the board's appointment powers from the now-Democratic governor to Republican State Auditor Dave Boliek. A previous 3-2 Democratic majority is now a 3-2 Republican majority. The new iteration of the board sounds open to embrace the Justice Department's wishes. Executive Director Sam Hayes said late Tuesday the lawsuit was being reviewed, 'but the failure to collect the information required by HAVA has been well documented. Rest assured that I am committed to bringing North Carolina into compliance with federal law.' The state and national GOP last year sued over the lack of identifying numbers, which they estimated could affect 225,000 registrants. But federal judges declined to make changes so close to the general election. The issue also was litigated after Election Day as part of formal protests filed by the Republican candidate for a seat on the state Supreme Court who challenged about 60,000 ballots he contended were cast by registrants who lacked an identifying number. The election board said earlier this year at least roughly half of those voters actually did provide an identifying number. State appeals courts criticized the board's handling of the registration records but ultimately ruled the challenged ballots had to remain in the final election tally. Democratic Associate Justice Allison Riggs defeated Republican challenger Jefferson Griffin by 734 votes out of over 5.5 million ballots cast.
