Alabama real estate licensing board faces lawsuit over alleged ‘race quota
The Man Behind the Landmark Supreme Court Challenge Takes on Alabama Licensing Board
The man who made headlines with his Supreme Court challenge against race-based college admissions policies is now turning his attention to an Alabama licensing board. Edward Blum, a prominent conservative opponent of affirmative action, is suing to prevent the board from imposing a “racial quota.”
A Fight Against Race-Based Criteria
This lawsuit marks a significant step for Edward Blum, as it is his first case against race-based criteria for membership on a state regulatory board. Blum’s organization, the American Alliance for Equal Rights, has named Governor Kay Ivey as one of the defendants due to her role in appointing members to the real estate appraiser board.
The complaint highlights an ongoing vacancy on the Alabama Real Estate Appraisers Board for a public member since 2021. However, state law currently mandates that at least two board members must be racial minorities, preventing the position from being filled.
Fighting for Equality
Blum firmly believes that no one’s race should determine their eligibility for government service. He stated, “It is to be hoped that the State of Alabama ends this policy immediately.”
The lawsuit is being handled by the libertarian Pacific Legal Foundation, a prominent firm known for challenging race- and sex-based preferences in public boards and commissions across multiple states.
A Stand Against Discrimination
Glenn Roper, senior attorney at the Pacific Legal Foundation, emphasized that race or ethnicity should not be used as deciding factors for public service. He stated, “Alabama’s Real Estate Appraisers Board does just that, excluding interested Alabamians from a currently open position on the board if they are not racial minorities. Put simply, that is unconstitutional.”
Blum’s group argues that the requirement to appoint at least two minorities to the board violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. They claim that this policy forces the governor to make decisions based on an applicant’s race, which is unconstitutional.
The Pacific Legal Foundation has previously handled similar lawsuits, including one in Arkansas that led to the repeal of a requirement for the Social Work Licensing Board to have at least two black members.
Anti-affirmative action advocates, like Blum, argue that the Supreme Court’s decision in the Students For Fair Admissions v. Harvard case last year made it clear that race-based policies cannot exist in publicly funded institutions. They have also sought to challenge diversity, equity, and inclusion programs in private industries.
The Washington Examiner has reached out to Governor Ivey’s office for a response.
What was the outcome of Blum’s previous Supreme Court challenge regarding race-based college admissions policies, and how does it relate to his current case?
S that the appointee must be an African American, which Blum argues is a violation of equal protection laws. Blum contends that race should not be a determining factor in the selection process, stating that qualifications and merit should be the sole criteria for appointment.
Blum’s previous Supreme Court challenge, Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, questioned the constitutionality of race-based college admissions policies. While the Court ultimately upheld the university’s use of race as a factor in admissions, Blum’s case sparked a national debate on the issue. Now, he hopes to continue advocating for a colorblind society by challenging race-based criteria in other areas, such as licensing boards.
The American Alliance for Equal Rights, founded by Blum, has been at the forefront of pushing for equal treatment under the law. The organization argues that policies involving race, whether in college admissions or state regulatory boards, perpetuate discrimination and hinder true equality.
Critics of Blum’s efforts argue that race-based criteria are necessary to address historical disparities and ensure diversity in certain professions. They argue that without these measures, minority representation in professions such as real estate appraisers would remain disproportionately low. Supporters of affirmative action argue that it is a necessary tool to rectify past inequalities and promote a more inclusive society.
Blum’s lawsuit aims to challenge the constitutionality of race-based criteria for membership on the Alabama Real Estate Appraisers Board. By targeting the state’s licensing board, he hopes to bring attention to the broader issue of race-based criteria in various professions. Blum asserts that such criteria are unnecessary and perpetuate discrimination, hindering individuals from pursuing their chosen careers based on merit alone.
As the case moves forward, it is likely to ignite further debates on affirmative action, equality, and the role of race in professional licensing. The outcome of this lawsuit and others like it will have far-reaching implications for how society approaches issues of race, discrimination, and equal opportunity.
Edward Blum’s challenge against the Alabama licensing board could shape the future of race-based criteria in various professions. While opinions on the issue remain divided, this case presents an opportunity to reevaluate the role of race in professional licensing and determine whether such criteria are constitutional and necessary for achieving true equality.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
