Last week, the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF) sent a cease and desist letter to the city of Omaha requesting that it repeal sections of its municipal code that give race- and sex-based preferences in the awarding of public contracts.
In response, city attorney Paul Kratz said Omaha suspended the contracting rules after the November election, and the city is drafting a new ordinance. (Source)
Under the city’s previous contracting compliance ordinance, businesses owned or operated by members of certain racial or ethnic groups were automatically designated “disadvantaged” and therefore subject to preferential treatment. Omaha allowed female- and minority-owned businesses to submit bids 30 days before other businesses and required 10 percent of the city’s contracting dollars to be awarded to such businesses.
Last November, 58 percent of Nebraska voters chose to bar their state from discriminating against or giving preferences in hiring, contracting, and admissions based on factors like race and sex. A group challenged the law in court earlier this year, but a judge upheld it.
The Omaha World Herald reports that the legislature passed a bill to change Nebraska’s “diversity” scholarship program to comply with the law barring the state from discriminating against or preferring individuals on the basis of race in hiring, contracting, and admissions. But the Nebraska Civil Rights Initiative’s Marc Schniederjans says the law requires nothing less than ending such programs rather than changing them.
Legislative Bill 440 merely would remove the words “racial, ethnic and cultural diversity” and retain the word “diversity.” Any reasonable person who has followed the issues knows that “diversity” used in this context is another way of referring to race preferences in general and to blacks specifically. If the scholarship program gives preferences to anyone based on race or sex, it is illegal and must be suspended.
On November 4, 2008, 58 percent of Nebraska voters chose YES on Initiative 424. A group challenged the law in court earlier this year, but a judge upheld it.
(Photo credit: William Lauer)
Nebraskans United, a group that opposes a law barring state and local governments from preferring and discriminating against individuals based on race in hiring, contracting, and admissions, will not appeal a recent ruling upholding the law. (Source)
Last week, Judge Karen Flowers upheld the Nebraska Civil Rights Initiative and wrote that the facts didn’t present any evidence of fraud, as the group claimed. On November 4, 2008, the initiative won by 58 percent of the vote.
So it is written, so shall it be done!
Last week, Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman certified the results of the Nebraska Civil Rights Initiative (NeCRI) and officially enshrined the language of the initiative in the state constitution.
NeCRI executive director Doug Tietz said, “The voters overwhelmingly supported the Nebraska Civil Rights Initiative and now Nebraska’s state motto ‘equality before the law’ is officially the law of the land.”
On November 4th, Initiative 424 passed with over 58 percent of the vote.
Nebraskans voted to end state and local government discrimination and preferential treatment on November 4, 2008, as 58 percent said YES on Initiative 424.
Nebraska TV reports on the aftermath. Government-funded programs with racial and sex classifications must rewrite policies and begin hiring and recruiting without regard to skin color and sex. Colleges and universities in Nebraska with so-called affirmative action programs will have to consider factors other than race or sex when making admissions decisions. Government-funded scholarships and grants must be race- and gender-neutral.
Government entities with so-called affirmative action programs will no longer be allowed to deny someone a job because of his or her race or sex, nor can the government entity show preferential treatment to someone based on these factors.
University of Nebraska president J.B. Milliken said the new law “might affect our ability to do outreach and recruitment.” Not necessarily. Expanding outreach and recruitment efforts to blacks is not illegal under the new law. That is affirmative action. Applying different standards of hiring, contracting, and admissions to blacks is illegal. That is a racial preference, a practice that should be just as odious now as it was 50 years ago. If the university offers “outreach” funds in a racially neutral manner, the law will have no impact.
It’s not complicated, though the opposition tries to make it seem so. Read the FAQ on Initiative 424 to find out exactly what it means and what institutions and programs are affected.
As expected, the new law faces legal challenges.
