Civil and Human Rights

RELEASE: CAC Reacts to Court’s Discrimination Ruling

“Racial discrimination can infect the contract formation process, and that isn’t altered simply because those contract negotiations ultimately would have failed based on other grounds; the other grounds do not serve as a disinfectant.” — CAC President Elizabeth Wydra

WASHINGTON – On news this morning of the Supreme Court’s ruling in  Comcast Corp. v. National Association of African American-Owned Media and Entertainment Studios Networks, Inc., Constitutional Accountability Center President Elizabeth Wydra said: 

We are disappointed by today’s ruling by the Supreme Court. We are concerned that requiring a showing of but-for causation for these sorts of discrimination claims ignores not only the text and history of the statute, but also the reality of how racial discrimination functions in workplaces across this nation. As we explained in a brief filed on behalf of Members of Congress, the plain text of Section 1981 does not require a showing of but-for causation, unlike other statutes which contain causal phrases like “because of” and “results from.” Racial discrimination can infect the contract formation process, and that isn’t altered simply because those contract negotiations ultimately would have failed based on other grounds; the other grounds do not serve as a disinfectant.  

#

Resources:

CAC case page in Comcast Corp. v. National Association of African American–Owned Media and Entertainment Studios Networks, Inc.https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/comcast-corp-v-national-association-of-african-american-owned-media-and-entertainment-studios-networks-inc/

##

Constitutional Accountability Center is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history. Visit CAC’s website at www.theusconstitution.org.

###

More from Civil and Human Rights

Civil and Human Rights
July 18, 2026

Arnie Arnesen Attitude July 16 2026

Attitude with Arnie Arnesen
CAC’s David H. Gans joined The Attitude with Arnie Arnesen to discuss the Reconstruction Amendments. Listen...
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Wridt v. City of New York

In Wridt v. City of New York, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is considering whether the NYPD’s mass surveillance system is unconstitutional.
Civil and Human Rights
July 8, 2026

Ruling Away From America’s Second Founding

Slate
CAC’s David H. Gans wrote about the Roberts Court for Slate magazine. Read more in Slate.
By: David H. Gans
Civil and Human Rights
July 1, 2026

Furthering Inclusive Constitutionalism

Jotwell
Professor Allison Brownell Tirres reviewed recent scholarship on the Black Conventions of Reconstruction by CAC’s David H....
Civil and Human Rights
June 30, 2026

CAC Release: Roberts Court’s Conservative Supermajority Hollows Out Equal Protection Guarantee

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Little v. Hecox and West Virginia...
By: David H. Gans, Praveen Fernandes, Joshua Blecher-Cohen
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Supreme Court

Department of Labor v. Sun Valley Orchards, LLC

In Department of Labor v. Sun Valley Orchards, LLC, the Supreme Court is considering whether the Constitution permits the Department of Labor to use administrative proceedings to impose civil monetary penalties on employers who violate...