Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Race-based philanthropy has been very effective, but the Supreme Court may end the practice

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court will decide whether a grant program for Black female entrepreneurs constitutes racial discrimination.

commons.wikimedia.org

Johnson is a United Methodist pastor, the author of "Holding Up Your Corner: Talking About Race in Your Community" (Abingdon Press, 2017) and program director for the Bridge Alliance, which houses The Fulcrum.

The Supreme Court is currently examining a case of importance, one that brings race-based philanthropy into question. The case in question involves the Fearless Fund, an Atlanta-based organization led by Black women dedicated to combating the underfunding of venture capital by providing grants, tools and mentorship to women of color.

The American Alliance for Equal Rights, in representation of anti-affirmative interest, has taken legal action against the Fearless Fund. AAER alleges the Fearless Fund’s grant program for Black female entrepreneurs constitutes racial discrimination. In response, the Council on Foundations and Independent Sector has filed a joint amicus brief supporting the Fearless Foundation. The council is urging the court to dismiss the lawsuit and uphold the First Amendment right to donate to charitable causes that align with individual values, including efforts to support historically marginalized groups.


The opposing argument contends that race-based philanthropy infringes on the equal protection clause of the Constitution. It is a claim seeking to promote a more equitable distribution of resources and opportunities, asserting that race-based practices perpetuate racial divisions and undermine the goal of a color-blind society.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

However, the Council on Foundations and Independent Sector asserts that race-based giving is not only constitutional but also essential for addressing historic and systemic racial disparities. It argues that race-neutral strategies fail to address the specific challenges that communities of color face due to systemic racism. Moreover, the Fearless Fund’s supporting parties emphasize that race-based granting aims to level the playing field by providing targeted support to individuals and communities that have been systematically marginalized and disadvantaged.

As a program developer, I've had the unique opportunity to design and advocate for initiatives tailored to empower and uplift communities of color. This work has instilled within me a deep appreciation for the critical importance of race-focused funding. Our society's disparities are evident to those who operate at the nexus of philanthropy and social justice. We've personally witnessed the transformative power that targeted funding can have in redressing these disparities. This transformative potential hangs in the balance with the court's ruling, which has the power to either validate or undermine the practices we've championed – hence the gravity of this case.

Initiatives led by national entities like the Ford Foundation could face mission-altering changes depending on the decision. Ford serves as a sterling example of the efficacy and potential impact of race-focused funding. With a staggering commitment of $330 million over 2020 and 2021, the foundation has shown an unwavering commitment to racial justice. These ambitious efforts underscore the potential of focused funding to address racial disparities nationally.

Another example of the imperative for targeted granting and resource allocation is the Harlem Children's Zone, known for its innovative initiatives promoting racial equity and economic security in New York’s Harlem neighborhood. It has secured significant funding, including a $26 million commitment from The Audacious Project dedicated to addressing the needs of Black communities.

In my executive role with Bridge Alliance, I've partnered with community and private foundations to establish an equity fund. This fund prioritizes BIPOC+ communities and supports uniquely diverse regional and national leaders. Our work involves making strategic decisions about resource allocation, a role that could be significantly impacted by new legal restrictions on race-focused grants. However, we also acknowledge that the court's ruling may compel the field to devise more nuanced and innovative strategies to achieve our goals while working within the legal framework.

Lastly, I know intimately the life-changing impact of race-focused philanthropic efforts. Such grantmaking often provides access to education, opportunities and resources that would otherwise remain out of reach, addressing systemic inequalities in our society. It is important to remember these funds and strategic practices directing their disbursement hold transformative potential for individuals and communities of color.

The Supreme Court’s consideration of this matter is not merely about legal technicalities but the future of racial equity and the effectualness of focused funding. The court's ruling will undoubtedly send ripples through the philanthropic landscape, potentially redefining the strategies and means employed to achieve racial equity. Irrespective of one's stance on the issue, the conversations sparked by this filing underscore the pressing need for continued addressing of racial disparities in our society.

Read More

Trump’s "anti-" rhetoric answer to great replacement theory

Several blocks spaced out.

Getty Images / Sakchai Vongsasiripat

Trump’s "anti-" rhetoric answer to great replacement theory

The Fulcrum’s Executive Director Hugo Balta, whose social media platform exhibits highly factual and credibility ratings from the Media Bias/Fact Check, recently wrote in an op-ed, “This is the time to advance on DEI [diversity, equity, and inclusion] initiatives,” as opposed to President Trump and Elon Musk’s anti-DEI movement.

Let’s explore Mr. Balta’s contention from a research-based and reference-laden perspective to see if his position is true or false.

Keep ReadingShow less
Advance DEI, do not retreat from it

Diversity Equity and Inclusion Text on Wood Block

Getty Images//Nora Carol Photography

Advance DEI, do not retreat from it

  • President Donald Trump has directed that employees of federal offices focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) be placed on paid administrative leave.

This action is part of a broader initiative led by Elon Musk, who heads the newly established Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Musk has previously criticized DEI initiatives, labeling them as detrimental.

The ongoing debate around DEI laws and programs has seen significant opposition from some Republican leaders, who argue that these initiatives may undermine merit-based systems in hiring and education, particularly for white individuals.

Keep ReadingShow less
One faction in Congress DOES look like America

Senate Chamber Oregon State Capitol.

Getty Images / Powerofforever

One faction in Congress DOES look like America

Congress is often criticized for being “out of touch” with the American public. One biting critique is that Congress just doesn’t “look like” the constituents they represent. Its members are overwhelmingly more male, white, educated, and older than the general U.S. population. And while this holds true for most of Congress, there is one faction where it is not true: Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives. House Democrats more closely align with the demographic breakdown in the U.S. than any other party and chamber. There are some disparities—there are almost twice as many Black Democratic House members (25 percent) compared to the 14 percent in the U.S. population. And women are still a minority in the House Democratic Caucus (43 percent). But in other areas, House Democrats closely track America by race and gender. Hispanic and Latino House Democrats are at 17 percent, compared to 19 percent in the U.S. Even the ratio of LGBTQ members of the House is rising—with about five percent among House Democrats compared to seven percent in the U.S.

This is more than just a symbolic exercise. As the Native American saying goes, “Never judge a person until you walk a mile in his moccasins.” When our elected representatives share the living experiences of those they represent, it increases the likelihood they will be responsive to the needs and aspirations of the public. By comparison, House Republicans are woefully overrepresented by men (85 percent), and only one percent are Black and six percent are Latino. After being ousted as Speaker of the House, Rep. Kevin McCarthy in an interview lamented the sorry state of diversity in the Republican Conference. “I’d just become leader and I’m excited and President Trump’s there. And I look over at the Democrats and they stand up. They look like America,” he said. “We stand up. We look like the most restrictive country club in America.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Bridging Hearts in a Divided America

In preparation for U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's second inauguration in Washington, D.C., security measures have been significantly heightened around the U.S. Capitol and its surroundings on January 18, 2025.

(Photo by Celal Gunes/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Bridging Hearts in a Divided America

This story is part of the We the Peopleseries, elevating the voices and visibility of the persons most affected by the decisions of elected officials. In this installment, we share the hopes and concerns of people as Donald Trump returns to the White House.

An Arctic blast is gripping the nation’s capital this Inauguration Day, which coincides with Martin Luther King Jr. Day. A rare occurrence since this federal holiday was instituted in 1983. Temperatures are in the single digits, and Donald J. Trump is taking the oath of office inside the Capitol Rotunda instead of being on the steps of the Capitol, making him less visible to his fans who traveled to Washington D.C. for this momentous occasion. What an emblematic scenario for such a unique political moment in history.

Keep ReadingShow less