Edward Blum (litigant)

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

For the architect, see Edward Blum (architect).
Edward Blum
Born
Edward Jay Blum

(1952-01-09) January 9, 1952 (age 72)
Benton Harbor, Michigan, U.S.
EducationUniversity of Texas at Austin (BA)
State University of New York at New Paltz
Political partyRepublican

Edward Jay Blum (born 1952) is an American

ethnicity.[1]

Blum is the director of the Project on Fair Representation which he founded in 2005.

Sarah Scaife Foundation, and The 85 Fund.[4]

Since the 1990s, Blum has been heavily involved in bringing eight cases to the

Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College
lawsuits.

Early life and education

Blum was born in 1952 into a Jewish family in

anti-Semitic discrimination his family experienced during his youth helped form his beliefs.[8]

Political activism

While working as a stockbroker in

gerrymander a majority African-American district in order to grant increased voting power to minorities.[9] Blum eventually lost the congressional race. But he and others filed a lawsuit against the state of Texas, claiming that the racially gerrymandered districts violated the Fourteenth Amendment. The case, Bush v. Vera, went to the Supreme Court, which ruled in Blum's favor.[6]

Legal activism

Blum holds a fellowship at the

civil rights policy, affirmative action, multiculturalism, and redistricting
. He wrote the 2007 book The Unintended Consequences of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

His litigation includes

United States Supreme Court cases Bush v. Vera (1996), Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 v. Holder (2009), Fisher v. University of Texas (2013), Shelby County v. Holder (2013), Evenwel v. Abbott (2016), and Fisher v. University of Texas II
(2016).

In Shelby County, the Supreme Court struck down Section 4 of the

cold calling a county official.[11] He secured lawyers to represent them and funded the litigation with monies provided by conservative donors.[11]

In Evenwel, Texas voters sued Texas in a constitutional test case. Texas, like other states, divides its state legislative districts in a way that equalizes the total population of each district. However, some districts have more eligible voters than others because they have fewer minors, non-citizen immigrants, and convicted felons. The plaintiffs contended that this discriminates against voters in districts with high numbers of eligible voters since each person's vote has less power.[12] They wanted the Supreme Court to mandate that districts be drawn based on voter-eligible population rather than total population. In an April 2016 ruling, the Supreme Court upheld Texas's district scheme.[13]

The Fisher case, which challenged the

University of Texas's (UT) consideration of race in its undergraduate admissions process, was decided at the Supreme Court in 2013 and again in 2016. The first time, the Court bolstered the legal standard that universities must satisfy if they wish to consider race, emphasizing that the use of race is only permissible if race-neutral alternatives would be ineffective at producing campus diversity.[14] The second time, the Court applied the heightened legal standard to UT's admission policy, concluding that it passes muster and upholding it.[14] Blum sought out the plaintiffs in the Fisher case, persuaded them to file suit, and obtained legal representation for them as well as funding from wealthy conservative donors to fund the case.[11]

Legal challenges to race-conscious admissions

Other than the University of Texas, Blum has challenged race-conscious admissions policies at universities including

UNC-Chapel Hill
.

On October 1, 2019, a District Court ruled in favor of Harvard University. In the 130-page ruling, Judge Allison D. Burroughs found that the University did not discriminate on the basis of race, did not engage in racial balancing or the use of quotas, and did not place too much emphasis on race when considering an applicant’s admissions file. She also wrote that "Harvard has demonstrated that no workable and available race-neutral alternatives would allow it to achieve a diverse student body while still maintaining its standards for academic excellence."[16] SFFA petitioned the Supreme Court to review both the First Circuit's decision in the Harvard case and a similar decision from the Middle District of North Carolina, Students for Fair Admissions v. University of NC, et al., which focused on the impact on both Caucasian and Asian American applicants at the University of North Carolina and which had been decided in the school's favor in October 2021. On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court issued a decision that, by a vote of 6–3, reversed the lower court ruling. In writing the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts held that affirmative action in college admissions is unconstitutional.[17]

In September 2023, SFFA filed a lawsuit challenging the use of race and ethnicity as admissions factors at the

West Point Academy from using race as a factor in admissions to the military academy.[18]

Lawsuits against diversity requirements in businesses

Blum is the president of the Alliance for Fair Board Recruitment, an organization opposed to diversity requirements on corporate boards. The organisation is the plaintiff in lawsuits challenging diversity requirements for boards of certain publicly traded companies. The group sued to challenge California's race and gender quotas,[19] and Nasdaq's comply-or-explain rule.[20] California's race and gender quotas were found to be unconstitutional, and struck down.[21][22]

Blum continued his campaign against diversity mandates, particularly focusing on race. He founded a Texas group to file lawsuits the American Alliance for Equal Rights. The group's first lawsuit was in 2023 against the Fearless Fund, a venture capital fund that supports Black women business owners, it was founded to award grants to Black women who own small businesses through one of its programs. Blum's lawsuit challenges the legality of the grantmaking program under Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866.[23]

Works

  • Blum, Edward (2007). The Unintended Consequences of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. AEI Press.
    ISBN 9780844742571
    .

References

  1. ^ Smith, Morgan (February 23, 2012). "One Man Standing Against Race-Based Laws". The New York Times. Retrieved April 4, 2016.
  2. ^ Barnes, Robert (October 24, 2022). "How one man brought affirmative action to the Supreme Court. Again and again". The Washington Post. Retrieved January 21, 2024.
  3. ^ Park, Jeannie; Penner, Kristin (October 25, 2022). "The Absurd, Enduring Myth of the "One-Man" Campaign to Abolish Affirmative Action". Slate. Retrieved January 21, 2024.
  4. ^ Orakwue, Nia L.; Teichholtz, Leah J. (October 28, 2022). "SFFA Funded by Large Conservative Trusts, Public Filings Show". The Harvard Crimson. Retrieved January 21, 2024.
  5. ^ Savage, David G. (December 22, 2015). "Conservative legal strategist has no office or staff, just a surprising Supreme Court track record". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved January 21, 2024.
  6. ^ a b Biskupic, Joan (December 4, 2012). "Special Report: Behind U.S. race cases, a little-known recruiter". Reuters. Retrieved July 4, 2016.
  7. ^ "The Imperfect Plaintiffs" (Podcast). Radiolab. WNYC. June 28, 2016.
  8. ISSN 0362-4331
    . Retrieved May 14, 2023.
  9. ^ a b "Decade in review: One man's crusade against race-based policies". SCOTUSblog. December 30, 2019. Retrieved December 1, 2020.
  10. ^ Barnes, Robert (June 25, 2013). "Supreme Court stops use of key part of Voting Rights Act". Washington Post. Retrieved January 21, 2024.
  11. ^ a b c Writer, Staff (December 7, 2012). "Activist's goal: a nation blind to race". The Columbus Dispatch. Retrieved January 25, 2024.
  12. ^ Lithwick, Dahlia (December 9, 2015). "What Exactly Does "One Person, One Vote" Mean, Anyway?". Slate. Retrieved January 21, 2024.
  13. ^ "Evenwel v. Abbott, Governor of Texas" (PDF). US Supreme Court. Retrieved August 1, 2016.
  14. ^ a b "Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin" (PDF). US Supreme Court. Supreme Court of the United States. Retrieved August 1, 2016.
  15. ^ "Project on Fair Representation Files Suits against Harvard and UNC". Students For Fair Admissions. Retrieved August 1, 2016.
  16. ^ Walsh, Colleen (October 2019). "Judge upholds Harvard's admissions policy". news.harvard.edu/gazette. Harvard University. Retrieved October 1, 2019.
  17. ^ Totenberg, Nina (June 29, 2023). "Supreme Court guts affirmative action, effectively ending race-conscious admissions". NPR. Archived from the original on June 29, 2023. Retrieved June 30, 2023.
  18. ^ Students for Fair Admissions v USMA West Point Academy, unsigned (United States Supreme Court 02 February 2024).
  19. ^ "California Race, Gender Quotas for Boards Face Legal Test (1)".
  20. ^ "SEC Approves Nasdaq "Comply-or-Explain" Proposal for Board Diversity". August 26, 2021.
  21. ^ Goldberg, Nicholas (May 17, 2022). "Column: California's law requiring women on corporate boards was just struck down. I'm glad". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved July 8, 2023.
  22. ^ Courts decide California can’t mandate corporate board diversity
  23. ^ Raymond, Nate (August 2, 2023). "Conservative activist behind US affirmative action cases sues venture capital fund". Reuters.

Further reading

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Edward_Blum_(litigant)&oldid=1228839311"