Freedom of Speech is Non-Negotiable!


New SCOTUS Ruling Powerful Tool Against DEI

Scotus Hands Dei Opponents A New Tool To Fight Anti-White Discrimination In Government And Private Workplace
Scotus Hands Dei Opponents A New Tool To Fight Anti-White Discrimination In Government And Private Workplace
By john Livingston
April 22, 2024

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that workers can demand any discrimination, and they reduced the standard to take legal action against.

Does this case mean that heterosexual Caucasian males can sue for DEI Schemes?

The Left deals with an issue: its actions may threaten diversity, equity, and addition.

Bloomberg Law:

The recent US Supreme Court choice enabling a St. Louis police sergeant to pursue legal action over a supposedly discriminatory job transfer has been hailed as a significant triumph for employees’ rights, And that may well include the myriad facets of discrimination against whites, especially white, heterosexual males.

The judgment has sparked concerns that it may discourage companies from executing diversity and addition efforts, as it develops unpredictability about what is lawfully permissible. 

Some employment lawyers believe that this reasoning, that the harm needn’t be significant, could make it easier for workers to sue employers over some classic diversity programs



like fellowships or mentorships that only accept certain ethnic groups or genders.

” Anti DEI groups ‘will see this as an opening’ to bring actions against both private and government diversity programs,” a lawyer at the Legal Defense Fund told



The DEI landscape was already an elaborate maze for companies, but now it’s gotten a little bit harder to navigate. It is essential that any white male or female who feels they have been discriminated against in any manner seek relief under this law.  At I Speak for Trump we will b ealert to any further legal actions that can be taken to bring relief to the tens of millions of white men and women who have suffered discrimination under both government and private DEI programs. This case gives us a vital tool to fight back. 

It will be much easier to take legal action against:
Workplace discrimination due to sex or other protected characteristics– like race, color, faith, or nationwide origin– is prohibited. However, courts throughout the country have disagreed about how considerable the unequal treatment needs to be to warrant a legal claim. In this case, the city argued that Muldrow’s lateral move at the very same pay grade wasn’t substantially damaging enough to meet the requirement.

The Court decreased the bar to take legal action against:
The Supreme Court disagreed, stating a staff member just needed to reveal “some harm” under the terms of their work, however it doesn’t need to be “product,” “significant” or “major.” The decision makes it easier for workers to take legal action against over-prejudiced task transfers.

The case included a female moved within the City of St. Louis. While she kept the same wage, her hours and assignments were unequal. She claimed it was because of her gender.

The Court decreased the standard for the level of damage necessary to take legal action against. They have to reveal some harm. This standard also applies to more than just gender; it likewise applies to race, color, religious beliefs, or national origin.

HERE IS THE FULL RULING. Download and take it to your lawyer if you are a victim of anti-white discrimination, or any other related action.

Across the board, it’s prohibited to victimize you, even if you’re a white man