How would you avoid disparate impact liability?

Disparate impact theory tells employers that they have broken the law when a concededly neutral hiring practice produces too many employees of one race and not enough of another. Let’s … ›

Race-based academic goals are both offensive and ineffective

At PLF, we believe that individuals have a constitutional right to equal treatment by their government regardless of their race, and we’re actively defending that right. Last year we took … ›

Another one bites the dust

The Tennessee bill to ban race or sex preferences in government hiring, which we previously reported on here, is dead.  Readers will recall that the bill was amended at last … ›

Thoughtcrime and liability for alleged unconscious biases

In George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984, police monitored residents of Oceania for evidence of “thoughtcrime.”  In Pippen v. Iowa, a case that takes the concept of unintentional discrimination to dangerous … ›

Sacramento Superior Court holds "public officers" can treat people differently because of race

Today we learned that the Sacramento Superior Court sustained the government’s demurrer in Connerly v. State of California.  This case challenged Government Code Section 8252 as facially unconstitutional, because it requires … ›

Minority children are not inherently deficient– so schools should stop treating them that way

The Florida Department of Education and Virginia State Board of Education recently approved strategic plans that establish different race-based academic achievement goals for K-12 students.  As we’ve explained before, assigning … ›

Setting academic achievement goals based on skin color is a “race” to the bottom of educational policy

Individuals should not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.  Most children learn that famous line from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s … ›

PLF continues the fight against the unconstitutional Redistricting Commission selection process

PLF filed the next round of legal documents in Connerly v. California, et al. today. First, some background. In 2008, California voters created the California Citizens Redistricting Commission. The Commission … ›

What equality means

At PLF we believe that equality means treating everybody equally–that the government should not treat people differently because of something as genetically insignificant as skin color. We envision a society where … ›

Brand Logo for the blog page

How would you avoid disparate impact liability?

Disparate impact theory tells employers that they have broken the law when a concededly neutral hiring practice produces too many employees of one race and not enough of another. Let’s … ›

Race-based academic goals are both offensive and ineffective

At PLF, we believe that individuals have a constitutional right to equal treatment by their government regardless of their race, and we’re actively defending that right. Last year we took … ›

Another one bites the dust

The Tennessee bill to ban race or sex preferences in government hiring, which we previously reported on here, is dead.  Readers will recall that the bill was amended at last … ›

Thoughtcrime and liability for alleged unconscious biases

In George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984, police monitored residents of Oceania for evidence of “thoughtcrime.”  In Pippen v. Iowa, a case that takes the concept of unintentional discrimination to dangerous … ›

Sacramento Superior Court holds "public officers" can treat people differently because of race

Today we learned that the Sacramento Superior Court sustained the government’s demurrer in Connerly v. State of California.  This case challenged Government Code Section 8252 as facially unconstitutional, because it requires … ›

Minority children are not inherently deficient– so schools should stop treating them that way

The Florida Department of Education and Virginia State Board of Education recently approved strategic plans that establish different race-based academic achievement goals for K-12 students.  As we’ve explained before, assigning … ›

Setting academic achievement goals based on skin color is a “race” to the bottom of educational policy

Individuals should not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.  Most children learn that famous line from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s … ›

PLF continues the fight against the unconstitutional Redistricting Commission selection process

PLF filed the next round of legal documents in Connerly v. California, et al. today. First, some background. In 2008, California voters created the California Citizens Redistricting Commission. The Commission … ›

What equality means

At PLF we believe that equality means treating everybody equally–that the government should not treat people differently because of something as genetically insignificant as skin color. We envision a society where … ›

The Morning Docket

Stay up to date with the Morning Docket, a weekly highlight of PLF's best articles, videos, and podcasts.

How would you avoid disparate impact liability?

Disparate impact theory tells employers that they have broken the law when a concededly neutral hiring practice produces too many employees of one race and not enough of another. Let’s … ›

Race-based academic goals are both offensive and ineffective

At PLF, we believe that individuals have a constitutional right to equal treatment by their government regardless of their race, and we’re actively defending that right. Last year we took … ›

Another one bites the dust

The Tennessee bill to ban race or sex preferences in government hiring, which we previously reported on here, is dead.  Readers will recall that the bill was amended at last … ›

Thoughtcrime and liability for alleged unconscious biases

In George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984, police monitored residents of Oceania for evidence of “thoughtcrime.”  In Pippen v. Iowa, a case that takes the concept of unintentional discrimination to dangerous … ›

Sacramento Superior Court holds "public officers" can treat people differently because of race

Today we learned that the Sacramento Superior Court sustained the government’s demurrer in Connerly v. State of California.  This case challenged Government Code Section 8252 as facially unconstitutional, because it requires … ›

Minority children are not inherently deficient– so schools should stop treating them that way

The Florida Department of Education and Virginia State Board of Education recently approved strategic plans that establish different race-based academic achievement goals for K-12 students.  As we’ve explained before, assigning … ›

Setting academic achievement goals based on skin color is a “race” to the bottom of educational policy

Individuals should not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.  Most children learn that famous line from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s … ›

PLF continues the fight against the unconstitutional Redistricting Commission selection process

PLF filed the next round of legal documents in Connerly v. California, et al. today. First, some background. In 2008, California voters created the California Citizens Redistricting Commission. The Commission … ›

What equality means

At PLF we believe that equality means treating everybody equally–that the government should not treat people differently because of something as genetically insignificant as skin color. We envision a society where … ›

How would you avoid disparate impact liability?

Disparate impact theory tells employers that they have broken the law when a concededly neutral hiring practice produces too many employees of one race and not enough of another. Let’s … ›

Race-based academic goals are both offensive and ineffective

At PLF, we believe that individuals have a constitutional right to equal treatment by their government regardless of their race, and we’re actively defending that right. Last year we took … ›

Another one bites the dust

The Tennessee bill to ban race or sex preferences in government hiring, which we previously reported on here, is dead.  Readers will recall that the bill was amended at last … ›

Thoughtcrime and liability for alleged unconscious biases

In George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984, police monitored residents of Oceania for evidence of “thoughtcrime.”  In Pippen v. Iowa, a case that takes the concept of unintentional discrimination to dangerous … ›

Sacramento Superior Court holds "public officers" can treat people differently because of race

Today we learned that the Sacramento Superior Court sustained the government’s demurrer in Connerly v. State of California.  This case challenged Government Code Section 8252 as facially unconstitutional, because it requires … ›

Minority children are not inherently deficient– so schools should stop treating them that way

The Florida Department of Education and Virginia State Board of Education recently approved strategic plans that establish different race-based academic achievement goals for K-12 students.  As we’ve explained before, assigning … ›

Setting academic achievement goals based on skin color is a “race” to the bottom of educational policy

Individuals should not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.  Most children learn that famous line from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s … ›

PLF continues the fight against the unconstitutional Redistricting Commission selection process

PLF filed the next round of legal documents in Connerly v. California, et al. today. First, some background. In 2008, California voters created the California Citizens Redistricting Commission. The Commission … ›

What equality means

At PLF we believe that equality means treating everybody equally–that the government should not treat people differently because of something as genetically insignificant as skin color. We envision a society where … ›