Georgia federal court allows grant program for Black women to continue
A Georgia federal judge has refused to issue an injunction that would bar the Atlanta-based Fearless Fund from issuing grants to early-stage businesses owned by Black women, the Washington Post reports.
The lawsuit, filed by the American Alliance for Equal Rights, which is run by conservative activist Edward Blum, claims that by awarding $20,000 grants, support services, and mentorship to businesses owned by Black women, the Fearless Fund violates a section of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 that guarantees “race neutrality” in contracts, and engaged in “explicit racial exclusion” by operating a grant program “open only to Black females.” The legislation, which was passed after the Civil War to protect the rights of those freed from enslavement, is also being cited in similar lawsuits aimed at translating the recent college admissions ruling by the Supreme Court to the corporate sphere of hiring, contracting, and investment.
“What the plaintiffs are attempting to do here is to turn a civil rights statute on its head,” said Alphonso David, a civil rights attorney on the Fearless Fund legal team and CEO of the Global Black Economic Forum.
U.S. District Judge Thomas W. Thrash rejected the arguments, indicating that the grant program qualifies as charitable giving, a form of protected speech under the First Amendment. According to the Post, the decision could have implications beyond the venture capital firm at a time when corporate diversity efforts are facing growing legal and political pushback.
Backed by Mastercard and Bank of America, Fearless Fund aims to level the racial imbalance in venture capital funding. Over the past four years, it has awarded more than $26 million in investments and $3 million in grants to more than 40 businesses.
“Women of color continue to face significant barriers in obtaining access to capital,” Fearless Fund founders Ayana Parsons and Arian Simone said in a statement to the Post. “We are very pleased with the court’s decision to deny [the] plaintiff’s attempt to shut down our grant program and look forward to continuing to advance our critical mission.”
