DEI in the Workplace

Overview

The Supreme Court’s Harvard decision has heightened risks associated with corporate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs and initiatives, including corporate investments in minority owned financial institutions and funds. Though the Supreme Court’s decision did not address employment practices, the conservative activist group that alleged race-based college admissions in that case has launched broad side attacks on the DEI initiatives launched by companies in the wake of the murder of George Floyd. Claiming such initiatives violate Section 1981 of the 1866 Civil Rights Act, among other statutory and constitutional provisions, activist groups have both funded and filed reverse discrimination and other actions challenging DEI programs and initiatives. As a result, companies face novel and complex risk associated with programs that they have proudly and publicly declared reflect their values – values endorsed by their shareholders and that are key to employee morale. Crowell’s experienced team is working with a range of clients across industries to mitigate the ensuing risk.

We provide tailored strategic advice and counseling to clients who have invested heavily and are committed to their DEI programs and policies. We help clients:

  • Navigate nuanced issues, develop strategy, and provide concrete measures to minimize liability
  • Perform assessments and audits with a data-based approach to decrease risk
  • Evaluate implications of modifying existing DEI commitments to their organization’s brand, reputation, and business
  • Monitor evolving affirmative and defensive legal theories and litigation that will establish the risk profile of DEI programs and initiatives prospectively under Titles VI and VII of the Civil Rights Act and 42 U.S.C. 1981
  • Defend “reverse discrimination” litigation claims, private class action litigation, and government enforcement actions

Insights

Client Alert | 12 min read | 03.04.24

Implications for Private Employers of the Supreme Court’s Harvard Decision Banning Race-Based Affirmative Action in College Admissions

On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court held that it is unconstitutional (under the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause, as to public institutions) and a violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as applicable to private institutions accepting federal financial assistance) for colleges and universities to consider race as a factor in the admissions process. See Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard Coll., No. 20-1199, 2023 WL 4239254 (U.S. June 29, 2023) (“Harvard”), a summary of which can be found here. This decision upended decades of precedent and has caused employers in the private sector to ask how the decision will impact diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DE&I”) initiatives and employment decisions. This article addresses the impact of Harvard, eight months later....

Professionals

Insights

Client Alert | 12 min read | 03.04.24

Implications for Private Employers of the Supreme Court’s Harvard Decision Banning Race-Based Affirmative Action in College Admissions

On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court held that it is unconstitutional (under the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause, as to public institutions) and a violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as applicable to private institutions accepting federal financial assistance) for colleges and universities to consider race as a factor in the admissions process. See Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard Coll., No. 20-1199, 2023 WL 4239254 (U.S. June 29, 2023) (“Harvard”), a summary of which can be found here. This decision upended decades of precedent and has caused employers in the private sector to ask how the decision will impact diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DE&I”) initiatives and employment decisions. This article addresses the impact of Harvard, eight months later....