The principles elucidated by the June 2023 Supreme Court ruling outlawing affirmative action admissions policies at colleges and universities are apparently going to have to be fought out in lawsuits corporation by corporation, as many DEI execs seem determined to employ racism as a company mandate, but the “good” kind—that is, discrimination against whites, and especially white males.

America’s First Legal (AFL), a pro-bono non-profit public interest law firm has filed a federal civil rights complaint against Macy’s alleging egregiously illegal and unconstitutional hiring practices. AFL’s letter to Macy’s announcing the complaint is here.

A Macy’s 2019 press release —this company was ahead of the George Floyd Freakout DEI fad!—titled a “Bold Vision To Advance Diversity and Inclusion and Ensure The Company Reflects The Diversity Of The Customers and Communities Served” laid out a five-point plan to “[a]chieve more ethnic diversity by 2025 at senior director levels and above, with a goal of 30 %,” and to initiate a “12-month program designed to strengthen leadership skills for a selected group of top-talent managers and directors of Black/African-American, Hispanic-Latinx, Native American and Asian descent.” Racial quotas are illegal. The 30% quota requires managers to favor specified races and ethnicity races in hiring decisions, which directly breaches civil rights laws (though you and I can imagine how the company would try to argue that a goal isn’t a quota.) The plan also directs Macy’s advertising to hire 50% of all actors in their commercials from minority groups, meaning, obviously, non-whites.

I wonder how many other companies have internal directives like that? Based on what I see on TV, I’d guess quite a few.

Macy’s similarly vows to favor “suppliers that are more ethnically diverse, women-, veteran- and LGBTQ-owned businesses. That’s discrimination too.

AFL pointed out that Macy’s emphasized it determination to continue these legally dubious policies in a 2022 report, citing its goal as to “embed diversity, inclusion, and equity into how we think, act, and operate.” Companies apparently feel secure that they can get away with this kind of racial and ethnic bias. We shall see. On its face, it looks like the the AFL has a good case.

Robert Zimmerman, who gets the pointer for the story, writes, “[T]his policy also puts Macy’s board of directors on even weaker ground, subject to lawsuits for their breaches of their fiduciary duty. A company that hires unqualified people, merely because of their race, not only cannot function as it should (thus likely losing money and stockholder value), it risks costing the company serious penalties for violating the law.”

He continues, “Finally, there is the threat of a loss of business….Whether Macy’s board of directors will heed these warnings and shift course is presently unknown. If it doesn’t however it would be wise for any shareholders out there to consider selling their stock now.” Before Thanksgiving, AFL described the complaint on Twitter-“X”, alerting readers that Macy’s “appears to maintain politicize that perpetuate illegal racial discrimination—denying career advancement to white straight men.” It urged consumers to take this into consideration on “Black Friday.”

I initially missed the story because, apropos of Curmie’s latest commentary, the mainstream media virtually ignored the suit, while conservative sources like The Epoch Times highlighted it. Newsweek was the closest to a non-conservative source I could find, and it ‘poisoned the well’ right up front, making sure that readers knew it was Trump cronies involved in the suit (and we all know Trump and his gang are racists.)

Perhaps the positive spin and protection discriminatory policies receive from the woke-biased media is why companies like Macy’s think they can skirt the law with “good” discrimination.