Starbucks could be suffering from a case of buyer’s remorse over the gourmet coffee chain’s decision to hire former Attorney General Eric Holder’s law firm to provide diversity advice that led to a civil rights lawsuit after it enacted the policy recommendations.
In 2018, before the rest of corporate America jumped in on the D.E.I. grift following the George Floyd race riots, the company was dealing with the media firestorm over an incident at a Philadelphia store where a manager called the cops on two black men when it retained the services of Covington & Burling, a powerful Washington, D.C. law firm where “Obama’s wingman” is a senior counsel.
Bringing in Holder – who had national name recognition – and his firm showed that the company was serious about addressing issues with its perceived racism and the series of “civil rights assessments” that were conducted and detailed in a report issued in 2021 on the steps that Starbucks had taken to implement “equity.”
According to a report from the Washington Free Beacon, the new policies included “tying executive pay to diversity targets, setting spending goals for ‘diverse suppliers,’ and launching a mentorship program for ‘BIPOC’ employees, which Holder pressed the company to expand. Each initiative, he wrote, demonstrated the coffee maker’s ‘commitment to civil rights and equal treatment.'”
The outlet states that Holder has “charged as much as $2,295 an hour for such work.”
But now, the company is defending itself in an ongoing lawsuit over the programs that were implemented on Holder’s advice, a suit that is likely being watched closely as the racist impacts of corporate “diversity” programs are drawing overdue scrutiny as to their legality.
Starbucks paid Eric Holder, who charges up to $2,295 an hour for such work, to teach them how to be less racist. He told them to give racial preferences to minorities. They’re now getting sued for anti-white discrimination. https://t.co/ZcbKIalIki pic.twitter.com/bZqAwtCQ85
— Richard Hanania (@RichardHanania) July 27, 2023
“The lawsuit, which is still ongoing and was filed last August by the National Center for Public Policy Research, a conservative nonprofit that is also a Starbucks shareholder, argued that the programs violate non-discrimination laws as well as the company’s fiduciary duties. Such claims may have come as a surprise to Starbucks executives: At no point did Holder’s report address the legality of the policies at issue,’ the Free Beacon reported.
“The National Center is proud to stand up for the countless small shareholders who feel powerless to challenge Starbucks’ disregard for civil rights,” Scott Shepard, who serves as director of NCPPR’s Free Enterprise Project (FEP) said in a press release announcing the lawsuit. “It cannot be in the best interests of any shareholders for Starbucks’ executives and directors to steer the company into violating a huge array of civil rights law by discriminating on the basis of race. Those officials ought to be ashamed of themselves and must be held liable.”
Twitter users threw in their two cents over Starbucks’ reaping the consequences of their decision to listen to Holder, a man who has repeatedly shown that he’s obsessed with race.
Its remarkable these lawyers didnt know a law that applies to all races didnt apply to the white race.
— SCROTUS2024 (@scrotus2024) July 27, 2023
$2,295 an hour to tell people to be racist!
Who knew that DEI is so lucrative?
— Utah Log Cabin Republicans (@UtahLCR) July 27, 2023
Never ask the guy who is best known for approving a gun running scheme to the Mexican cartels which ended up killing hundreds including a US Border Agent, his advice on anything serious. Starbucks can’t get out of their own way.
— newmanian (@newmanian2) July 28, 2023
“Diversity” is almost always code word for racism against white people.
— Matias Page ⭕️ HORMETIK (@Hormetik) July 27, 2023
They should demand a refund from him.
— DeedleFake (@DeedleFake) July 27, 2023
Seriously, these operations, like Covington, HRC, BLM, etc., need to be criminally prosecuted for extortion.
— Brian Knotts (@brianknotts) July 27, 2023
Yeah, but what other benefits do they get from paying off a well-connected former AG? How many investigations and inquiries are never going to happen? That could be well worth $2,295/hr and a lawsuit settlement in the long run.
— Patrick Reed (@patjreed) July 27, 2023
I would suspect that a lot of law firms will get sued for malpractice for advising companies to go all in on unconstitutional “diversity” initiatives.
— EO (@EdOlson54485733) July 27, 2023
“Starbucks has set goals for the number of ‘diverse’ — meaning not-white — employees it hires, and those goals are tied to executive compensation. That is outright racial discrimination,” Shepard said. “All Americans have the same civil rights. Making employment decisions based on race violates those civil rights. Officers and directors who act on such discriminatory policies are violating their fiduciary duties to their shareholders and should be held accountable for those actions.”
Get the latest BPR news delivered free to your inbox daily. SIGN UP HERE
Comment
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.