MAGA's Blueprint for a Modern-Day Jim Crow 2.0.

When I came out before the Supreme Court ruling in Lawrence v. Texas, same sex relationships in Virginia carried the possibility of a felony conviction.  Even if not frequently enforced, the sodomy laws carried an ever present threat. Now, I have been married to my husband for over 10 years and until the results of November 5th became clear, fears of the past were in the past. Now, with Project 2025 the unofficial agenda for  the second Trump regime, those fears are back with same sex marriage and non-discrimination protections targeted by the extremists behind Project 2025 and likely at least a few of the "Christian" extremists on the U.S. Supreme Court.   However scary things may be for LGBT citizens currently, for racial minorities things could be even worse as the Project 2025 authors seek to ban diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in the work place, educational institutions and probably eventually in public accommodations and businesses catering to the public.  All of this will be done under the ostensible ruse of being "colorblind" and "gender neutral."  A piece at Salon looks at this insidious agenda to bolster white privilege and right wing "Christian" orthodoxy.  Here are highlights: 

Donald Trump’s vow to ban diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in workplaces and educational institutions on day one of his administration is not about fairness—it’s about erasing decades of progress and reinstating systemic racial barriers under the guise of equality. This is not a neutral policy proposal but the blueprint for a modern-day colorblind Jim Crow 2.0.

Calling DEI “Didn’t Earn It,” as critics derisively refer to it, is not just insulting but echoes the rhetoric and practices of the Jim Crow era, which were designed to delegitimize the achievements and contributions of Black Americans by framing them as unqualified or undeserving. The poll taxes and literacy tests of that era operated under the idea that Black people were fundamentally unqualified to participate in democracy. The Supreme Court justified “Jim Crow” aka separate but “equal” by arguing in Plessy v. Ferguson that racial separation did not impose inequality and that any perception of inferiority among Black Americans was a result of their own faulty thinking. Ironically the Roberts Court, in its decision to strike down affirmative action in college admission also accused Black people of a similar type of “faulty thinking.”  Chief Justice Roberts wrote for the majority: “They have wrongly concluded that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin

A key figure in Trump’s anti-DEI agenda is Stephen Miller, who according to reports is set to become Trump’s Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy. Miller has proposed transforming the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) into an entity focused on addressing what he calls “anti-white discrimination.” Thus, Trump’s presidency appears poised to roll back workplace protections for Black Americans to a degree not seen since the end of Reconstruction, which ushered in Jim Crow.  For Black professionals, who already navigate systemic barriers and entrenched inequities, this represents a direct assault on their workplace opportunities and dignity.

U.S. institutions—from housing to education—have systematically excluded Black Americans and other people of color for generations, creating barriers that persist today. Programs like the GI Bill, celebrated as America’s first “color-blind” policy, ostensibly extended benefits to all veterans. Yet in practice, Black veterans were excluded from the housing loan benefits that white veterans used to build generational wealth. This exclusion laid the foundation for the racial wealth gap that still endures: Black Americans, on average, hold a fraction of the wealth of white Americans.

Today, DEI initiatives aim to address these inequities, but Trump and his allies, including Christopher Rufo, the architect of the “critical race theory” panic, frame these programs as preferential treatment. They claim DEI promotes “unqualified” Black professionals and other people of color, while advocating for a so-called “color blind” meritocracy.

Miller has gone from theory to action in his role with America First Legal, amplifying the myth of reverse discrimination. He has targeted institutions like Northwestern University and NASCAR with lawsuits and complaints, alleging that DEI initiatives marginalize white men. But the data tells a starkly different story. According to an article in USA Today, about the EEOC complaint Miller brought against NASCAR, Miller alleged that NASCAR, one of the least diverse sports, was discriminating against white men because it had a program to increase the diversity of the pit crew.  According to the article, NASCAR has just one Black driver in its premier Cup Series and five Black pit crew members out of more than 300. So, would fairness be zero? Miller’s narrative is a deliberate attempt to weaponize “colorblindness” and allegations of reverse discrimination to dismantle programs fostering equity.

Trump’s agenda doesn’t just aim to dismantle DEI—it seeks to, like the Plessy Court and the Roberts Court,  delegitimize the very idea that systemic racism exists. This tactic is part of a long historical pattern. In 1866, President Andrew Johnson vetoed the Civil Rights Act, arguing it unfairly advantaged Black Americans over whites and articulated what could be called the first reverse discrimination argument. Trump’s strategy follows the same playbook, updated for today’s political landscape.

Trump’s attack on DEI is not just a rollback of policy, it is a test of our national commitment to equity and justice. The stakes could not be higher.