The Trump Administration just declared the EEOC’s disparate-impact regime unconstitutional.
Disparate impact forced employers to trade neutral standards for racial quotas.
This is a direct strike on one of the Left’s favorite tools for forcing racial outcomes through law.
For decades, disparate impact let our managerial elite treat neutral standards as suspect if they produced the “wrong” racial numbers.
It banned things like background checks, aptitude tests, knowledge exams, hiring screens, and merit-based selection.
That regime is over.
OLC’s conclusion is clear: EEOC’s Title VII guidelines are unconstitutional because they impose liability based on disparate outcomes alone and pressure employers into race-based decision making.
This gives force to President Trump’s April 23, 2025 Executive Order exposing disparate-impact liability as anti-merit at its core: a regime that treats differences in outcomes between identity groups as proof that neutral standards must be abandoned.
From that Executive Order:
"It is the policy of the United States to eliminate the use of disparate-impact liability in all contexts to the maximum degree possible to avoid violating the Constitution, Federal civil rights laws, and basic American ideals."
This is what restoring equal protection looks like.
No racial quotas. No federal pressure campaign forcing employers to discriminate in the name of anti-discrimination law.
Civil rights law should mean what Americans were told it meant: equal treatment under law, meritocratic standards, and no racial balancing by bureaucrats.
The era of managerial elites laundering their left-wing nation-building project through disparate impact liability is over.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Mohsen Mahdawi, a 34 year old at Columbia University who spent 15 YEARS as an undergrad student, is on his way to being deported back to his native Jordan.
These "forever students" show a MASSIVE loophole in our system. 🧵
Foreign nationals on F-1 visas staying enrolled 15-25+ years to live here indefinitely.
Thousands of foreign "students" who entered 2000-2010 STILL have active F-1 status as of 2025.
This is ridiculous and must end.
DHS calls them exactly that: "forever" students, perpetually enrolled to remain in the U.S.
No repeated vetting. Weak oversight.
Past admins let this drag on since the 1970s "duration of status" rule.
Victory. No more taxpayer-backed home loans for illegal aliens.
This is one of those things you can't believe was actually happening.
American citizens are struggling to buy homes while mass migration drives up prices and strains the housing supply. 🧵
Mass migration is driving up home prices: HUD report shows foreign-born residents fueled over half of owner-occupied housing growth in CA & NY, spiking costs for American buyers.
This move by @SecretaryTurner ends American taxpayers paying for housing for illegals.
Illegal aliens were never eligible, but the Biden administration bent the rules.
Secretary Turner is fixing it with audits and DHS checks. Americans who play by the rules, stay prioritized.
According to the Public Interest Legal Foundation, its client is challenging the Illinois Voting Rights Act of 2011’s redistricting mandates under the Fifteenth Amendment and federal Voting Rights Act.
That is exactly the kind of litigation Callais invites.
Illinois did not hide the ball.
When Gov. Pritzker signed the maps, he invoked the Illinois Voting Rights Act and praised redistricting plans designed to preserve “clusters of minority voters” with “collective electoral power.”
Virginia's map just got struck down. Is California next?
California's "mapmaker" drew its new maps to "ensure" that racially gerrymandered "VRA seats are bolstered in order to make them most effective." That's illegal under Callais.
@AAGDhillon: Here's how we can do it. 🧵
California state law requires an "independent" Commission to draw its district maps.
But Newsom and state Legislature Dems overrode the Commission last year to gerrymander.
That meant hiring a "mapmaker"—Paul Mitchell—to do it.
But he drew an illegal racial gerrymander.
Before SCOTUS's recent Callais decision, courts interpreted the VRA to effectively *require* racial quotas in gerrymandering.
As Justice Thomas explained, that was “repugnant to any nation that strives for the ideal of a color-blind Constitution.”