/1🚨BREAKING — Following the disclosure of damning internal company documents, AFL has filed a formal EEOC complaint against @Disney alleging pervasive illegal discrimination based on race and sex.
THREAD:
/2 The law prohibits Disney from using race, color, religion, sex, or national origin merely as a motivating factor for hiring, training, or promotions.
/3 But a document on Disney’s “Reimagine Tomorrow” website strongly suggests that race, color, religion, sex, or national origin are often the only motivating factor in Disney’s hiring, training, and promotion decisions and that the company is intentionally discriminating against white American men, Christians, and Jews simply because of their race, sex, religion, and citizenship. reimaginetomorrow.disney.com
/4 All Disney General Entertainment productions are required to comply with Disney’s DEI “Inclusion Standards.”
Some of the standards explicitly provide that fifty percent of the following jobs must be filled by members of “Underrepresented Groups.”
Keep reading…
/5 These jobs include:
✔️Regular and recurring actors and characters in Disney content
✔️Producers and writing staff
✔️Overall crew or project staff
✔️Line producers and/or production department heads – including, for example, the director of photography, composer, costume designer, editor, production designer, and music supervisor
/6 Productions can also comply with the inclusion standards by promoting members of Underrepresented Groups, creating jobs “to facilitate union eligibility for members of Underrepresented Groups,” and facilitating a “[s]ubstantial year-over-year increase in members of Underrepresented Groups as directors and in writing staff.”
/7 In addition, a leaked FAQ document on Disney’s “Inclusion Standards” describes the company’s broader plan “to increase training and development opportunities for members of underrepresented groups” in a racially exclusionary manner.
/8 Disney admits that an example of an “inclusive hiring and employment practice” is “improving access to training and development opportunities for members of underrepresented groups.”
/9 Disney’s self-reported workforce demographic data shows that it is aggressively engaged in illegal race- and sex-based workforce balancing, with immutable characteristics apparently serving as a determinative factor in at least some of its employment and contracting practices. For example…
/10 From FY 2020 to FY 2021, the percentage of Disney directors identified by Disney as “people of color” grew by 6%
/11 From FY 2020 to FY 2021, the percentage of individuals identified by Disney as “people of color” and female “series regulars/leads” increased by 4% and 1%, respectively.
/12 From FY 2020 to FY 2021, the percentage of writers identified by Disney as “people of color” also grew by 3%
/13 Interestingly, Disney’s aggregate workforce data shows that between FY 2021 and FY 2022, the percentage of individuals identified by Disney as “white” dropped by 3.6% and as “black” by 0.5%
/14 The percentage of individuals identified by Disney as “Hispanic” increased by nearly 1%
/15 However, the largest increase noted is for a category Disney labeled “not disclosed,” which grew by 3.2% percent during the relevant time.
Because Disney is not transparent, knowing precisely what the aggregated data means is impossible.
/16 For example, it is possible that some individuals who formerly were identified as white or black are now classified as “not disclosed.” Nevertheless, the data seem to support Disney’s claims that race, color, religion, sex, and/or national origin are each a motivating factor in the company’s employment practices.
/17 Finally, Disney maintains an illegal grant program that funnels $25,000 to “Underrepresented Directors.” The program unlawfully only awards grants to “women, AAPI, Black, Indigenous/Native, Latinx, LGBTQIA+, disability-identifying, and religiously marginalized individuals.”
/18 America First Legal is unrelenting in its fight to stop race and sex illegal discrimination.
/1🚨BREAKING—AFL has filed a complaint with the Dept. of Education, urging an immediate investigation into Illinois’ new law forcing annual mental health screenings on children without parental consent—a clear violation of federal law and shocking expansion of state power.
/2 Illinois’ Public Act 104-0032 orders schools to screen kids in grades 3–12 for mental health issues at least once a year, starting in 2027.
No consent. No parental notice. Just the State interrogating children about their private emotions, family life, and home environment—and recording their answers in a government database.
/3 Under the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment, schools must obtain affirmative written parental consent before subjecting any child to any “survey, analysis, or evaluation” about their mental health or psychological condition.
Illinois’ new law ignores that requirement entirely.
/1🚨PROTECT YOUR CHILDREN — America First Legal just released a template letter that parents can use to opt out of radical classroom instruction and woke school policies.
/2 AFL’s letter enables parents to exercise their rights after the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor.
The Court held that a school district violated parents’ rights by failing to provide notice and an opportunity to opt out before exposing children to radical LGBTQ storybooks.
/3 AFL’s letter also helps parents exercise their rights under the PPRA — a federal law that requires schools to give parents notice and an opportunity to inspect classroom materials.
/1🔎NEW — AFL has expanded its investigation into the City of Portland and the Portland Police Bureau.
We’re examining the bureau’s involvement with anti-ICE groups and Antifa — and whether it let radical demonstrators disrupt ICE operations, assault reporters, or shield Antifa.
/2 AFL has requested records to uncover how Portland officials may have enabled lawlessness — including by assisting anti-ICE groups in acquiring office space.
/3 This expands AFL’s ongoing investigation into the City of Portland, which previously uncovered its explicit inclusion of race as a central component of the city’s policing practices to achieve “equitable outcomes.”
/1🚨EXPOSED — New documents reveal that after Hamas terrorists’ October 7 attack, Biden’s DOJ DOWNPLAYED the surge in antisemitism across America — while giving the SPLC an OPEN LINE to steer federal civil-rights policy away from policing antisemitic violence.
/2 BEFORE OCTOBER 7, 2023:
Combating antisemitic violence was on DOJ’s agenda.
In December 2022, it was listed on the event memo for the Deputy Attorney General’s “Quarterly Civil Rights Organization Meeting,” lumped in with “Anti-LGBTQ+ Violence.”
/3 The agenda for the 2022 meeting included addressing “White Supremacy in Law Enforcement,” in addition to “Anti-LGBTQ+ Hate” and the SPLC’s perspective on hate crimes data.
/1🚨BREAKING — Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis didn’t dismantle its illegal “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” regime.Â
Instead, they hid their DEI office on a restricted floor.
America First Legal found it.
🧵….
/2 The Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, once on the 1st floor of the North Medical Building — open and visible to the public — has been moved to the 12th floor of the Mid Campus Center, a restricted-access floor omitted from the university’s official floor plan.
/3 An office built on “equity and inclusion” now operates behind locked doors, inaccessible to the public, the students, and the community it claims to represent.
We’d ask what WashU is hiding — but we already know.
/1🚨HUGE — The University of Virginia has agreed to DISMANTLE its illegal DEI infrastructure following a months-long federal civil rights investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice and a federal civil rights complaint from America First Legal.
/2 The agreement requires UVA to end race-, sex-, and identity-based discrimination across its operations, report compliance data through 2028, and certify in writing quarterly that every department is in full compliance with federal civil rights laws.
/3 This action follows AFL’s extensive investigation and subsequent federal civil rights complaint calling for enforcement against UVA’s discriminatory practices.
AFL exposed UVA’s unlawful attempts to preserve and rebrand DEI under euphemisms, proving the university’s so-called “reforms” were cosmetic.