In a bold move echoing the sentiments of anti-affirmative action advocate Edward Blum, the American Alliance for Equal Rights has taken legal action against the Alabama Real Estate Appraisers Board. Their bone of contention? The board’s mandate requiring two minority members, deemed discriminatory by Blum’s group.
Blum, known for his prior victories in Supreme Court battles against race considerations in college admissions, staunchly opposes any form of racial criteria. “No one’s race should be used to include them, or exclude them, from service on government boards,” he asserted.
Represented pro bono by lawyers from the Pacific Legal Foundation, the lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of Alabama’s requirement. The target? Governor Kay Ivey, responsible for appointing board members, now facing legal scrutiny over her compliance with the racial mandate.
This legal skirmish is not an isolated incident. Blum’s organization has a track record of challenging race-based policies, recently triumphing against Harvard University and the University of North Carolina. Now, they aim to dismantle Alabama’s law, which mandates racial representation on the real estate appraiser board.
The crux of the argument lies in the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, with Blum’s group contending that mandating racial representation violates constitutional principles. Their stance is clear: qualifications, not race, should dictate board membership.
The implications of this lawsuit extend beyond Alabama’s borders. Pacific Legal Foundation has spearheaded similar legal battles across 25 states, targeting race and sex-based membership requirements on public boards and commissions.
From Arkansas to Iowa, the tide is turning against such criteria. Arkansas repealed its mandate for Black members on its Social Work Licensing Board following a PLF lawsuit. In Iowa, a federal judge recently struck down gender-based restrictions on a judicial nominating panel.
As the legal battle unfolds, the case of American Alliance for Equal Rights v. Ivey stands as a pivotal moment in the ongoing struggle against race-based policies. The outcome could reshape the landscape of state regulatory boards nationwide, challenging the status quo and advancing the principles of equality under the law.
