Thursday, December 5, 2013

Update on Protected White Males (I Got the Doc!)

Ask and ye shall receive. In my last post, explaining that white males are a protected class, I asked readers for docs pertaining to the case in which the Archie's Comics CEO claimed white males are not a protected class. Well, reader Mark E. Moore came up huge!

He emailed me the Defendant's brief, which I have uploaded to Google Docs (here). Upon review, here are some additional thoughts:

  • It's a motion to dismiss relying on several arguments. Defendant is hardly hanging her hat on the defense that white males are not a protected class. That said, the brief clearly states in no uncertain terms, "White males are not a member of a protected class under this section of the HRL (New York's Human Rights Law)."
  • In my post, I explained that white males are protected under federal law with the caveat that it might be different under state law. Here, the NY statute uses the same "because of . . . race/sex" language used in Title VII. Presumably, it protects whites and males as well (although I have not researched the issue under NY law at all).
  • The brief fails to cite the specific section of the HRL to which it is referring, and similarly fails to cite anything supporting the assertion that white males aren't protected. I am not persuaded.
In any event, I thought you might be interested in reading the actual arguments in the docs. Thanks again Mark!