Hacker News Reader

Comment by hmry | Hacker News Reader

(Legally as in, using the legal system)

DOJ sued Deloitte over DEI programs, they ended up settling for $21.5 million: https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/deloitte-pay-215-mi...

Texas Attorney General declared DEI initiatives unconstitutional in a legal opinion: https://www.gibsondunn.com/texas-attorney-general-declares-p...

Several state Attorneys General sent legal threats to 20 major law firms over DEI: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/republican-led-states-deman...

Texas Attorney General warned major banks that DEI programs violate feduciary duty: https://today.westlaw.com/Document/Ibce2fdc5dcec11efb708bbad...

View on HN

You can add IBM to the list. They paid a settlement for their practice of tying executive bonuses to quotas: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/ibm-pays-17-million-resolve-a...

There's a big difference between suing people for prima facie illegal hiring practices and suing people for holding Grace Hopper celebrations. We probably shouldn't conflate them. Your links, as best as I can tell, are about the former sort of activity - hiring or paying people differently on the basis of protected characteristics.

Probably, but corporations and assimilated organizations will not take the risk.

You understand that none of these companies believe the merits of why they are settling?

They are settling because, like the law firms Trump suborned, they didn't want the MAGA rage; especially in the case of Texas, where Trump may (correctly as it goes) think Paxton is a disgusting slug of a man, but still vocally supports him.

The legal system was just the venue. All of this is bullshit corporate spinelessness in the face of threats without merit, especially in firms like Deloitte, who do not want their M&A interfered with.

I don't understand why you're replying to me like that

> You understand that ...?

Yes I do

OK. That is fine. It was literally a question so as to work out if we were on the same page for what I wrote subsequently. I will make a mental note that the phrasing doesn't come across that way.

As an aside I think my brain jumped the track and had me thinking I was replying to another commenter I'd replied to already -- who wrote a sibling comment to yours.

My apologies.

No worries! :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com