• Messaging, in general, is positive - taking action to protect ALL lawful voters .  • The SAVE Act enhances our ability to ensure that only citizens vote.  • It protects US-born AND naturalized citizens who worked hard to get there • Yes, it is currently unlawful for non-citizens to vote in federal elections, but this ensures that only citizens vote in any and all elections, and ADDS the requirement for citizenship verification at registration that is currently missing .  • Counter argument to the Left: • The only people it "suppresses" are non-citizens. • Why would you not want to protect non-citizens from innocently committing a voting felony that could prompt deportation or denial of a citizenship application? • If you have any questions, please let me know. The SAVE Act now has 90 co-sponsors, let's work together to increase that number to 100+! • @AshevilleTeaPty;@TheRightMelody; @EIwatchdogs; @TPPatriots; #SAVE2024; #nceit

Catastropic security failure. Why?? https://www.theburningplatform.com/2024/07/13/eyewitness-watched-trump-shooter-crawl-into-position-on-barn-roof-alerted-police-nothing-was-done/

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-house-to-vote-on-bill-that-will-require-proof-of-citizenship-for-casting-ballot/ar-BB1pJM5m?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=5c00695b1f6b441da0422eb3c6d763bd&ei=14 Congressional Republicans will vote this week on a bill to require people to show proof of citizenship to register to vote, a move that comes as they lay the groundwork for undermining election results in November. The House will vote on the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility bill, or Save bill, which would make states require, in person, documents that prove a person is a US citizen when registering to vote. This can include a Real ID, passport or other kinds of identification that show a person’s place of birth. It wouldn’t include a standard drivers license as a sole form of identification and calls for a secondary proof of place of birth alongside it, like a birth certificate. Debate starts at 1:45PM - 3PM on CSPAN.

Letter to Andres Riddle, Owner of the Building corner of Allen and King in Hendersonville, NC Hi Andrew, Hope this finds you and your family well.   I felt very compelled to get in touch with you regarding the mural with the rainbow LGBTQ+ flag on the back side of your building.  Frankly, I was in disbelief.  We have been fighting this monstrosity for over a year.  We have been lied to and deceived by the city council, city manager and called racists when we attend DEI meetings to point out how this does not welcome all Americans.   We were assured this thing would not go up in Hendersonville, as a ‘Welcome to Hendersonville,’ no less. Goal 26  of The 45 Goals of the Communist Party read into the Congressional Record on January 10, 1963  reads: 26.  Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as ‘moral, normal, and healthy.  What are we doing?   Tell us what we can do to help you remove this divisive and insulting flag mural that divides us. The American Flag is what unites us.  What is happening to this great place is appalling.  We are turning into a Leftist, over crowded county.  There is a movement to dismantle DEI and lawsuits brought against them which needs to happen here.  https://www.ashevilleteaparty.org/post/dei-programs-toppled-amid-a-surge-of-conservative-lawsuits .  Besides this monstrosity flag mural, the DEI Hendersonville is engaging in discriminatory hiring practices.  It’s un-American and unconstitutional. There is a bill in congress to stop this.  We intend to bring the same kind of legislation here to NC.  This is no way to treat people, and it’s no way to run America’s federal government or our local and city government Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) and Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas) have introduced The Dismantle DEI Act (S. 4516 / H.R. 8706) to comprehensively eliminate taxpayer funding of DEI federal offices, programs, grants, and training. The Left is trying to bring us back in time by using immutable characteristics such as race or sex as hiring criteria instead of an individual’s ability to perform the job. This Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) agenda is being used in the federal bureaucracy and is a form of unconstitutional discrimination that guarantees that under-qualified people will get Hope to hear from you soon. We're here to help. Thanks and stay safe.  Jane Bilello   -- Jane Bilello 209 986 3845 jane.bilello@gmail.com 218 Vincent Place Hendersonville, NC 28739 As Thomas Jefferson wrote to his friend Richard Price on January 8, 1789:  “… whenever the people are well informed they can be trusted with their own government; that whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them to rights.”

https://www.ashevilleteapac.org/post/only-citizens-vote-dismantle-discriminatory-dei

Our team is asking you to help get legislation over the line. Before the legislators leave the short session, we want them to pass the amendment regarding procurement and challenge to instructional and supplemental materials. Please send an  individual email to each of the people listed below. You may edit the letter as you see fit. Use their name and your name. Please send a copy to the legislative assistant also. Appreciatively, The Pavement Education Project Team Suggested letter (feel free to edit to make it your own): Subject Line:  Vote Yes for HB 263 with changes to  §115C-98.5. (c)  Dear Representative or Senator [Last name], I urge you to support the proposed amendment to HB 263 which addresses instructional and supplemental materials used in North Carolina public schools.  The selection and procurement of materials as well as the challenge of materials must follow the guidelines as stated in the bill and found in § 115C-98.5. (c)  Challenges to supplementary and instructional materials shall be made in writing and submitted to the local board of education. The challenge shall specify that the material being challenged is one of the following: (1)  obscene, (2)  i nappropriate to the age, maturity, or grade level of the students (3) not aligned with the standard course of study (4) pervasively vulgar. I would like to see the same standards used for challenges to also be used in the purchase of new instructional and supplemental materials. I do not see that stated anywhere.  There would be far less challenges if the four standards noted above were implemented. I also ask that the bill create a more balanced community media advisory committee with more citizens representing the school district community.  As written, the bill creates a ratio of 9 (school staff) to 2 (community members) to evaluate material challenges. I see this as a grave disadvantage for the challenger. To be fair the ratio should have equal representation of the two groups.  I appreciate your service to the citizens of North Carolina and hope that you continue to work to improve the public-school education system in our state.  Every child deserves a sound basic education that prepares him/her for the future. Unfortunately, there are many school employees who are intent on providing minor students with materials and instructions that are not age appropriate. We are seeing an influx of materials that are not educational but are instead: obscene, vulgar, and/or diverse in gender and sexual orientation. Some materials even promote political agendas and activism.  The focus of public schools must be on education which is a state constitutional mandate. Please carefully consider my requests.  Let me know if you wish to discuss this further.   Sincerely, Your Name Your address and phone number Your email address Legislators List:  Rep Tim Moore  Tim.Moore@ncleg.gov LA   Kerrington Maggard      Kerrington.Maggard@ncleg.gov Rep John Bell  John.Bell@ncleg.gov LA  Susan W. Horne       Susan.Horne@ncleg.gov Rep  BRENDEN H. JONES  BRENDEN.JONES@NCLEG.GOV LA  James Williams         James.Williams@ncleg.gov Sen Phil Berger  Phil.Berger@ncleg.gov LA  Abbigail Clark          Abbigail.Clark@ncleg.gov Sen Mike Lee  Michael.Lee@ncleg.gov LA  Andrew Stiffel          Andrew.Stiffel@ncleg.gov Rep Destin Hall  Destin.Hall@ncleg.gov LA  Kari Nadler          Kari.Nadler@ncleg.gov Rep Donny Lambeth  Donny.Lambeth@ncleg.gov LA  Pan Briles .      Pan.Briles@ncleg.gov Rep Hugh Blackwell  Hugh.Blackwell@ncleg.gov LA  Jacob Kuhn       Jacob.Kuhn@ncleg.gov Rep John Torbett  John.Torbett@ncleg.gov LA        Viddia.Torbett@ncleg.gov Rep Jason Saine  Jason.Saine@ncleg.gov LA  Jennings Tumlin         Jennings.Tumlin@ncleg.gov Rep Dean Arp  Dean.Arp@ncleg.gov LA  Anne Arp         Anne.Arp@ncleg.gov Sen Ralph Hise  Ralph.Hise@ncleg.gov LA Susan Fanning.     Susan.Fanning@ncleg.gov Sen Brent Jackson  Brent.Jackson@ncleg.gov LA  Jason Melber          Jason.Melber@ncleg.gov

Please consider writing a letter to destin.hall@ncleg.com , grey.mills@ncleg.gov , harry.warren@ncleg.com , paul.newton@ncleg.com , ralph.hise@ncleg.com , warren.daniel@ncleg.com , We need answers. The short session can be over at any time and this needs to be resolved. Representative Jake Johnson House Deputy Majority Whip NC District 113 Chair: House Select Committee on Oversight and Reform 300 N. Salisbury Street, Rm. 530 Raleigh, NC 27603-5925 919-715-4466 July 5, 2024 Jane Bilello 218 Vincent Place Hendersonville, NC 28739 NCEIT.org 209 986 3845 Jane.Bilello@gmail.com   Dear Jake,   Happy Fourth of July!  Hope you are doing well.  And as always, thank you for your service.    I see that the House Selection Committee on Oversight and Reform is meeting this Tuesday, July 9th, 2024  at 9AM.  There are election integrity issues that desperately need to be addressed because the NCSBE needs to be held accountable for their lack of transparency and negligence to clean up the voter rolls. The NCSBE continues to fail to clean up the voter rolls and to gather the 400.00+ missing Social Security numbers and drivers’ licenses  to verify citizenship and legitimacy to vote.        As you know, the Constitution of the State of North Carolina provides that in order to vote in this state, a person must be a citizen of the United States.   ARTICLE VI SUFFRAGE AND ELIGIBILITY TO OFFICE   Section 1.  Who may vote. Every person born in the United States and every person who has been naturalized, 18 years of age, and possessing the qualifications set out in this Article, shall be entitled to vote at any election by the people of the State, except as herein otherwise provided.   Sec. 2.  Qualifications of voter. (1) Residence period for State elections. Any person who has resided in the State of North Carolina for one year and in the precinct, ward, or other election district for 30 days next preceding an election, and possesses the other qualifications set out in this Article, shall be entitled to vote at any election held in this State. Removal from one precinct, ward, or other election district to another in this State shall not operate to deprive any person of the right to vote in the precinct, ward, or other election district from which that person has removed until 30 days after the removal.   It is further a criminal offense under the federal criminal code for a noncitizen to vote in a federal election.   Additionally, because of federal law requiring states to comply with the provisions of REAL ID, the North Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles requires persons seeking a REAL ID to provide proof of US citizenship (or permanent resident status).   With the North Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles receiving and retaining data regarding the citizenship status of a significant number of residents of our state by virtue of REAL ID, and in order to ensure compliance with our state’s requirement that persons registering to vote are both residents of the state and are US Citizens, it is important that the citizenship data maintained by the North Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles be made available to the North Carolina State Board of Elections for purposes of verifying citizenship status of voter registration applicants prior to adding applicants to the voter rolls of our state.   Additionally, the citizenship data maintained by the DMV should be provided to and relied upon by election officials for purposes of confirming citizenship status of those already on North Carolina State Board of Elections voter registration list. Also, driver’s licenses of non-citizens (who are here legitimately) and those of us who are US citizens are indistinguishable. Until the law is changed, REAL ID does not distinguish between a non-citizen and a US citizen putting US citizens’ votes in jeopardy of being cancelled resulting in stolen votes and a fraudulent election.      To ensure that there is an ongoing sharing of data regarding the citizenship status of all persons registered or seeking to register to vote in North Carolina, we would like your help with the responses to the following questions to the NCSBE regarding the collection and retention of data by the North Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles regarding citizenship status of persons in our state and sharing of that data with the local County Board of Elections  for purposes of confirming citizenship status of voters, collecting social security numbers and driver’s licenses.    Your assistance is greatly needed to hold the NCSBE accountable for the collection of the following information from the DMV that should be open to the public.    The key questions that must be asked of the NCSBE-   1.    Will the official North Carolina Voter Registration List be updated to include all HAVA-required Drivers License or SSN information before the start of early voting this year?   2.    If not, please explain why our voter rolls will not be compliant with federal law, and why the NCSBE and local boards cannot secure the information needed to get compliant with federal law.   3.    Finally, what specifically are the NCSBE and local boards of election doing to correct this missing information?       Your assistance with these matters is of great importance and it is truly appreciated. I will follow up with you via phone before July 9.  We request answers to these questions from the NCSBE so we can assure the public that this upcoming 2024 election is fair and honest making it Easy to Vote and Hard to Cheat. Thank you.   Sincerely, Jane Bilello Chair: Asheville Tea Party Board Member: North Carolina Election Integrity Team NCEIT.org   Cc: Jim Womack North Carolina Election Integrity Team NCEIT.org 919 776 2255   Jay Delancy Chair: Voter Integrity Project North Carolina Election Integrity Team NCEIT.org 919 332 4129   Joanne Empie North Carolina Election Integrity Team NCEIT.org 919 819 1981    Sue Butcher Chair: Liberty First Grassroots North Carolina Election Integrity Team NCEIT.org 919 213 7165   cc  destin.hall@ncleg.com , grey.mills@ncleg.gov , harry.warren@ncleg.com , paul.newton@ncleg.com , ralph.hise@ncleg.com , warren.daniel@ncleg.com   References   America First Legal Sends Directive to All 50 States on Preventing Illegal Aliens from Voting Amidst Reports of Biden Regime Distributing Social Security Numbers and Voter Registration to Illegals   https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/06/america-first-legal-sends-directive-all-50-states/   Complaint Filed alleging unlawful retention of voter data by leftwing non-profits in NC https://www.nceit.org/post/complaint-filed-alleging-unlawful-retention-of-voter-data-by-leftwing-non-profits-in-north-carolina   Jane Bilello 209 986 3845 jane.bilello@gmail.com

Great speech by Mark Robinson to bring in the 4th of July here! https://youtu.be/iEgkKSRzHGw?feature=shared

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/?s=illegals+voting+in+nc By Patty McMurray Mar. 17, 2024 6:30 pm The Perfect Storm Explained: Drivers Licenses for Illegals + Noncitizen Voting + Mail-in Ballots + Private Funding of Elections + Partisan Hack SOSs Does undocumented immigrant mean illegal alien? Undercover Video Exposes Illegal Aliens Admitting to Being Registered to Vote in North Carolina https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/07/undercover-video-exposes-illegal-aliens-admitting-being-registered/ America First Legal Sends Directive to All 50 States on Preventing Illegal Aliens from Voting Amidst Reports of Biden Regime Distributing Social Security Numbers and Voter Registration to Illegals https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/06/america-first-legal-sends-directive-all-50-states/ America First Legal (AFL) , a conservative legal group, has sent letters to officials in every state urging them to enforce existing laws that prevent illegal immigrants and non-US citizens from registering to vote or casting ballots in elections. The AFL letter was addressed to the chief election official of all 50 states, with copies sent to each Governor and Attorney General. The letter outlined how two key existing federal laws could be used to obtain information from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security about the citizenship or immigration status of any individual for “any purpose authorized by law.” “Biden is giving registration forms and social security numbers to illegals. America First Legal is sending an urgent ACTION PLAN to officials in all 50 states on how to stop illegals & non-citizens from voting. States must ensure only citizens vote,” wrote on its social media. Miller, former senior advisor to President Trump and America First Legal President, said, “Joe Biden is mass importing criminal migrants, giving them social security numbers, and handing out voter registration forms to migrants, and vigorously opposes any and every effort to verify the citizenship of voters before voting. This is a clear, unambiguous, and direct effort to sabotage the 2024 election through potential mass illegal alien voting — aiding and abetting dramatic foreign interference and the subversion of our democracy.” Gene Hamilton, America First Legal Executive Director, added, “States have the utmost authority, obligation, and expectation from the American people to prevent noncitizens from voting in elections. Congress has equipped States with the tools necessary to verify the citizenship status of registered voters and remove ineligible foreign nationals – but States must act swiftly to ensure that only citizens vote in this fall’s elections.” New Deals Now At The Gateway Pundit Discounts Page At MyPillow – Including the $25 Extravaganza! According to the news release : The Problem:  The issue of noncitizens voting in federal elections can be complex–including what States are and are not allowed to do when voter applicants use the federal form:Federal law prohibits foreign nationals from voting or registering to vote in federal elections.Federal law also imposes upon States an obligation to conduct voter list maintenance.The U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) created a federal voter registration form that does not require applicants to demonstrate proof of citizenship. Instead, it merely requires voter registrants to sign a form “under penalty of perjury,” swearing or affirming that “I am a United States citizen.” The Supreme Court of the United States previously held that because the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) requires that States must “accept and use” the EAC form–which does not require documentary proof of citizenship–then “the NVRA forbids States to demand that an applicant submit additional information beyond that required by the Federal Form.” The result is that, under current law as interpreted by the Supreme Court,  anyone can register to vote using the EAC Federal Form without providing documentary proof of citizenship. This outrageous state of affairs, which is completely contrary to common sense and the practices of other countries across the world, has led to numerous bills being introduced to correct the situation at the point of voter registration—such as the  SAVE  Act. Such bills are essential to protect the integrity of our elections. This plan provides something that States can do NOW until legislation like the SAVE Act becomes law. Further, aside from the weaknesses in the EAC Federal Form, there are gaps and loopholes in the voter registration process in States that do not (or did not in the past, particularly prior to the requirements of the REAL ID Act of 2005 related to driver’s licenses) require documented proof of citizenship. Even DHS’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program, which many states use in various ways to determine eligibility for access to benefits for aliens in the United States, has critical flaws that make it unworkable for most States and localities to use to verify a voter registrant’s citizenship status. Most notably, SAVE requires users to submit an Alien Registration Number or some other DHS identifier to run queries through the system–something that States and localities do not have when registering someone to vote. Accordingly, under the status quo, States and localities have generally been unable to ensure that aliens are not registered to vote and that they ultimately do not vote in federal elections. ADVERTISEMENT The Solution: Two federal statutes that have been on the books for nearly three decades allow states to obtain information about the citizenship or immigration status of any individual for any lawful purpose. Specifically, 8 U.S.C. § 1373(c) provides that (the reference to the former Immigration and Naturalization Service, abolished twenty-three years ago, now means the Department of Homeland Security): Further, 8 U.S.C. § 1644 provides that: Each statute makes clear that States and localities can submit a request to DHS to obtain the citizenship or immigration status of any individual “for any purpose authorized by law.” And further, not only can they request the information, but DHS “shall respond” to such a request, and they cannot be prohibited or restricted from receiving that information. As explained above, federal law unambiguously requires that voters in federal elections be United States citizens and prohibits all foreign nationals, even those who are lawfully present in the United States, from registering to vote or voting. Federal law also imposes on States the duty of ensuring that ineligible voters are removed from voter rolls. Also, many States impose citizenship requirements under State law, and 8 U.S.C. § 1644 confers on States unrestricted authority to obtain information about the immigration status of aliens in the United States. Therefore, it is a “purpose authorized by law” under 8 U.S.C. § 1373(c) for a State to ask DHS about the citizenship status of presently registered voters. Accordingly, States and localities should submit requests to DHS to verify the citizenship or immigration status of registered voters on voter rolls where there are any reliable indicators that a voter may not be a U.S. citizen.  While foreign nationals voting in American elections is a serious problem under any circumstances, under President Biden’s abysmal leadership, America is facing the greatest immigration crisis the world has ever witnessed. With legions of illegal aliens crossing the border every day and  programs that fly  hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens into cities across the United States, the likelihood and volume of noncitizen voting has never been higher.

Happy Independence Day! We are so fortunate to be able to honor our Founding Fathers’ courageous decision to break free from Great Britain’s tyranny and create the greatest nation on earth – a nation founded on the consent of the governed and the protection of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. As an American historian, I like to take this day to reflect on how our shared conservative principles find their roots in the American founding and the broader traditions of Western Civilization.In 1775, John Adams wrote an essay in response to loyalist arguments that reflected many of the ideas that eventually appeared in the Declaration of Independence. He wrote: “All men are by nature equal; that kings are but the ministers of the people, that their authority is delegated to them by the people, for their good, and they have a right to resume it, and place it in other hands, or keep it to themselves, whenever it is made use of to oppress them.” But what he says next is what’s especially remarkable. Adams says these aren’t new ideas but rather: “They are the principles of Aristotle and Plato, of Livy and Cicero, and Sidney, Harrington, and Locke; the principles of nature and eternal reason, the principles on which the whole government over us now stands.” Our Founders were not mindless revolutionaries trying to overthrow the government and sow chaos. They were creating a new form of government that would conserve and fulfill the traditions developed through centuries of Western Civilization.And that is what we’re fighting to preserve as conservatives today. We are in the midst of the second American Revolution, fighting for the very foundational principles that made America great.We must double down on our efforts to defend our Founders’ legacy for future generations.It ’s why, thanks to our members, Heritage remains laser-focused on taking back America by dismantling the deep state, promoting policies that improve American lives, and restoring our Founders’ vision for self-governance in America.I think it’s fitting to leave you with some encouraging words from George Washington’s General Orders to the Continental Army. “The eyes of all our countrymen are now upon us, and we shall have their blessings, and praises, if happily we are the instruments of saving them from the tyranny mediated against them. Let us therefore animate and encourage each other, and show the whole world, that a freeman contending for liberty on his own ground is superior to any slavish mercenary on earth.” The eyes of all our countrymen are upon us again. Let us all do our part to promote the good life and preserve the truth, goodness, and beauty of Western Civilization and our Founders’ vision for America.Thank you for standing with us in this critical time for our country.God Bless America. Sincerely,Kevin D. Roberts, Ph.D.President, The Heritage Foundation

The 45 Goals of the Communist Party read into the Congressional Record on January 10, 1963, lists Goal 26: Present homosexuality, degeneracy, and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy." It's taken us 61 years to wake up to this? https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/dei-programs-toppled-amid-a-surge-of-conservative-lawsuits/ar-BB1oZl21?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=ce09b6246fc74bccb356b6e68894d853&ei=32 Right-leaning public interest groups have filed a barrage of federal lawsuits intended to dismantle long-standing corporate and government programs that consider race in awarding jobs and other perks, and their litigation already is eroding the use of affirmative action in an array of American institutions. One year after the Supreme Court struck down race-based admissions at Harvard and other schools, court rulings have forced the removal of racial preferences from two major covid relief programs, a federal contracting program that doles out $20 billion a year, and even the U.S. Minority Business Development Agency, a 55-year-old agency that was ordered in March to open its doors to all races. Meanwhile, private companies are acting preemptively, seeking to avoid litigation by terminating fellowships and executive bonus programs aimed at employing minorities. “The goal is complete race neutrality. That is the end goal of all this litigation,” said Daniel Lennington, a lawyer for the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL). “It’s a view of radical equality that we think is in line with the Declaration of Independence.” Encouraged by the Supreme Court’s conservative majority, WILL and other groups have filed more than 100 lawsuits since 2021 challenging racial preferences and other efforts to address demographic disparities in business, government and education, according to a Washington Post tally based on news articles, law firm newsletters and interviews. More lawsuits are in the pipeline. Through social media, the conservative legal groups are urging anyone with a gripe about racial preferences to give them a call. “Wherever you live, if you’ve been treated differently because of your race, contact us!” Lennington posted on X. Another group, Color Us United, runs a “DEI Tip Line” from its website. And at America First Legal, former Trump adviser Stephen Miller warns in a promotional video that corporate policies “punish Americans for being White, Asian or male” and advertises a toll-free phone number to call for free legal services. Former Trump adviser Stephen Miller's America First Legal led a successful challenge to the Biden administration’s debt relief program for minority farmers.© Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images “If you or a loved one were denied a job, raise, promotion or professional opportunity as a result of diversity quotas, equity mandates, affirmative action or other racial preferences, we want to hear from you,” Miller says, fingers pointed at the camera. “Please! Call us.” While cases of “reverse discrimination” have been brought in U.S. courts for years, the conservative campaign has been invigorated by the Supreme Court’s ruling last June that race-based college admissions decisions at Harvard and the University of North Carolina violated the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection under the law. Recent victories in court — along with a rising volume of complaints filed in districts with conservative judges — suggest this wave of litigation could substantially alter how American institutions handle issues of race. Even advocates of diversity programs acknowledge that some long-standing practices are endangered. Any organization that provides a palpable benefit to a person based on race, national origin or sex now runs a potential legal risk, said Kenji Yoshino, a professor at New York University and the director of the Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging. Under the current direction of the Supreme Court, Yoshino said, it will be “virtually always illegal” for a government or private entity to use racial classifications for hiring, promotion or other benefits. Other, more limited programs to promote diversity — such as anti-bias training and efforts to ensure fairness in hiring — will remain, he said, adding: “The Supreme Court is never going to complain about attempts to remove bias.” ‘A chilling effect’ So far, the conservative groups have won their most significant victories against the federal government. In addition to rulings against the Minority Business Development Agency and the covid relief programs, a federal judge last year ordered changes in a U.S. Small Business Administration program that offered preferences in contracting to “socially disadvantaged” individuals. After a White woman sued, the court said the agency could no longer automatically presume racial minorities fit that definition, and the agency began requiring all applicants to document their disadvantage. “The cases are going pretty quickly and decisively against the government programs,” said Jason Schwartz, an attorney at Gibson Dunn, which has set up a “DEI Resource Center” and is handling a high-profile case against the Fearless Fund, a venture capital firm that offers grants to Black female entrepreneurs. Especially since the Harvard decision, Schwartz said, “those [government] cases are harder to defend.” Private companies, by contrast, have more legal leeway to implement diversity programs, attorneys said, and those cases have advanced more slowly. But a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in the Fearless Fund case may be a harbinger of the challenges ahead for private-sector diversity programs. This month, the appeals panel blocked the firm from awarding its latest round of grants. The case — filed in August by a group led by Edward Blum, the same activist responsible for the Harvard litigation — could have broad implications for other race-conscious initiatives in the private sector. Fearless Fund CEO Arian Simone, center. The venture capital firm offering grants to Black female entrepreneurs is facing court challenges.© Tom Brenner for The Washington Post “This is the life and blood of the civil rights movement,” said the Rev. Al Sharpton, a civil rights advocate following the case. If the Fearless Fund loses, “we are the generation that lost what preceding generations provided for us.” The Harvard decision has so transformed the legal landscape that some companies are abandoning diversity programs as a defensive measure even before any litigation is filed. Lauren Hartz, an attorney at Jenner & Block who advises companies with diversity, equity and inclusion programs, said the litigation has had “a chilling effect.” “One lesson from the [court] decisions so far is that some of the qualities that can make DEI programs meaningful and effective — like specific targets, accountability in leadership, and significant benefits reserved for the groups most in need — are the same qualities that can make DEI programs more susceptible to legal challenge,” Hartz said. “Most companies would rather not be in the position of defending against the next major lawsuit.” A covid backlash Polls show that Americans have nuanced views about efforts to promote diversity. While significant majorities have favored limited DEI programs such as anti-bias training, internships and special recruitment efforts for underrepresented groups, according to a 2024 survey by The Post and Ipsos , many Americans appear to oppose explicit racial preferences in decisions about employment, promotions and college admissions. Before the Supreme Court’s Harvard ruling, nearly 2 in 3 people surveyed in a 2022 Washington Post-Schar School poll said they would support banning the use of race and ethnicity in college admissions. Similarly, a 2019 poll by Pew Research found that a majority of adults — whether White, Black or Hispanic — said companies should consider only a person’s qualifications in hiring and promotion decisions, even if it results in a less-diverse workforce. However, poll results can shift significantly depending on the questions posed. Amid this public ambiguity, the economic hardships of the coronavirus pandemic and the police killing of George Floyd in May 2020 inspired a fresh focus on the need for “racial equity,” leading to a raft of new public and private diversity programs. On his first day in office in January 2021, President Biden signed an order declaring that “affirmatively advancing equity, civil rights, racial justice, and equal opportunity is the responsibility of the whole of our government.” Less than two months later, Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act, a massive covid relief effort that included at least two programs offering aid dependent on the applicant’s race. One program sought to forgive federal loans issued to farmers who were racial minorities. The other program, worth $28.6 billion, provided restaurateurs with as much as $10 million to recover their pandemic losses, giving priority to restaurants owned by women, veterans, and “socially and economically disadvantaged” individuals. But a backlash soon followed. Together, the two covid programs provoked 14 lawsuits — the beginning of the current wave. Surging donations Most of the cases tallied by The Post were funded by a dozen conservative legal groups, many of them regional nonprofits with relatively small budgets. The Milwaukee-based WILL, for example, reported just $3.6 million in revenue in 2023, the most recent year for which information is available. America First Legal, which has cultivated a national profile, burst onto the scene in 2021 with a successful challenge to the Biden administration’s debt relief program for minority farmers . But other groups have been around for years, including the Pacific Legal Foundation in Sacramento, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression in Philadelphia and the National Center for Public Policy Research in Washington. Those groups have seen a steady uptick in contributions from donors eager to test the waters since President Donald Trump’s appointment of three conservative Supreme Court justices. Between 2017 and 2022, funding to 10 of the most active groups nearly quadrupled, from just over $35 million to more than $135 million, according to a Post tally based on their most recent tax disclosures. Frank Paul Lukacs of Virginia protests against affirmative action policies outside the Supreme Court on Oct. 31, 2022, on the day the high court heard oral arguments in the case.© Eric Lee for The Washington Post These groups generally are not required to disclose the source of their donations. But some of the largest appear to be donor-advised funds such as Donors Trust and the Bradley Impact Fund, tax-exempt organizations that grant money at the recommendation of donors who receive tax breaks for their contributions. As tax-exempt organizations, donor-advised funds also are generally not obligated to disclose their donors. Lawson Bader, president and CEO of Donors Trust, an Alexandria, Va., nonprofit that held nearly $1.4 billion in assets as of 2022, acknowledged a growing interest in funding these legal groups. “There has been an increase in the creation of public interest litigation firms at the state level, and conservatives have been engaged in this space for some time,” Bader said in an email. “I think the general attitude is ‘more’ might be accomplished via legal challenges than can be obtained through White House and/or Congressional actions (and that affects both parties).” Cannabis stores and corporate boards The flow of cash has helped finance legal operations that have locked onto an astonishing array of targets. In the past three years alone, lawsuits have been filed to: Undo racial preferences in awarding licenses for cannabis dispensaries in New York state. Pursue employee complaints about diversity training sessions at a major cancer center in Washington state, public schools in Springfield, Mo., and Honeywell, an international conglomerate. Abolish racial quotas for boards governing podiatric medical examiners in Tennessee, real estate appraisers in Alabama, a state bar association in New Jersey, and even companies listed on the Nasdaq stock exchange. Eliminate racial preferences in fellowships intended for minorities at Pfizer, one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies; similar fellowships at three nationally prominent law firms; and a nationwide physician partnership that offers incentives to Black physicians. Many of the cases have yet to be decided, but lawyers are closely watching a handful with potentially significant implications. A federal judge in Kentucky is expected to rule soon on whether to temporarily enjoin the U.S. Transportation Department from awarding contracts based on race under its Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program, which received at least $37 billion under Biden’s Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. The case was filed by WILL on behalf of two contracting businesses that say they were excluded from the program. And in May, the right-leaning U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit heard oral arguments in a case challenging a rule imposed by Nasdaq, which lists more than 3,000 companies, including Nvidia, Microsoft and Apple. Nasdaq requires companies to include at least one “diverse” director on their boards or explain in their filings to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission why they do not. Under the rule, “diverse” means someone who identifies as female, an underrepresented minority or LGBTQ+. The National Center for Public Policy Research and Blum’s Alliance for Fair Board Recruitment challenged the rule in 2021, arguing that it amounts to a “quota” that the Securities and Exchange Commission was not authorized to approve. Nasdaq has defended the rule as a requirement for disclosure, not a mandate. The 5th Circuit is expected to issue a decision in the coming months. Scott Shepard, general counsel for the National Center, said he’s confident his group will prevail, not just in the 5th Circuit and not just before the Supreme Court, if the case makes it that far. To Shepard, the Nasdaq case is a small part of a much larger movement that already is reshaping society. “It’s gratifying [to see] Americans saying, ‘No, the American ideal — the American experiment — is based on treating individuals as individuals and allowing each of them to rise to the level of their effort and their success and their merit and their possibilities.’ “From our point of view,” Shepard said, “it’s glorious.”