I'm not sure what's worse; that these people honestly believe what they're saying and they live in such an insulated bubble that anything contrary is impossible to consider, or they're just lying to everyone's face as easily as they breath.
Disparate impact has been a thing since 1970 USSC decision Griggs vs Duke Power. It is official US government policy that any policy or program that disparately impacts minorities is assumed as racist.
disparate impact is junk law that was peeled back in an appeal over a decade ago. it started with a case on a company refusing to hire convicted felons, and the appeals court said it was not disparate impacts. even crazier, the obama admin had put on this junk science sociologist onto the stand, talking all this conclusory bullshit that had nothing to do with this policy. and the appeals court just obliterated the trial judge and the "expert". SCOTUS refused to even take up the case to overturn it.
a year later, SCOTUS said in Texas Department of Housing & Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project, Inc., that it's only disparate impacts if the policy purportedly creating the discriminatory impact is "artificial, arbitrary, and unnecessary".
I'm not sure what's worse; that these people honestly believe what they're saying and they live in such an insulated bubble that anything contrary is impossible to consider, or they're just lying to everyone's face as easily as they breath.
Disparate impact has been a thing since 1970 USSC decision Griggs vs Duke Power. It is official US government policy that any policy or program that disparately impacts minorities is assumed as racist.
Disparate Impact Theory has been the most successful rebranding of communism to date.
disparate impact is junk law that was peeled back in an appeal over a decade ago. it started with a case on a company refusing to hire convicted felons, and the appeals court said it was not disparate impacts. even crazier, the obama admin had put on this junk science sociologist onto the stand, talking all this conclusory bullshit that had nothing to do with this policy. and the appeals court just obliterated the trial judge and the "expert". SCOTUS refused to even take up the case to overturn it.
a year later, SCOTUS said in Texas Department of Housing & Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project, Inc., that it's only disparate impacts if the policy purportedly creating the discriminatory impact is "artificial, arbitrary, and unnecessary".