Judge Allows Starbucks to Maintain Its Anti-White Hiring Quotas

On August 11, 2023,  Chief United States District Judge Stanley Bastion ruled against a conservative organization that filed a lawsuit against Starbucks over the coffee chain’s anti-white hiring practices that allegedly broke various federal and state laws.

Bastian dismissed the National Center for Public Policy Research (NCPPR)’s lawsuit against Starbucks dealing with its alleged “affirmative action” policies that consisted of granting contracts to “diverse” suppliers and advertisers and connecting executive compensation to allegedly anti-white hiring quotas.

NCPPR filed a complaint on August 30, 2022, at the State of Washington Spokane County Superior Court, where it accused Starbucks of enacting 7 policies that had the coffee chain actively discriminate using race in its compensation and employment decisions, which includes hiring, firing, and promotions, and in its contracting dealings with vendors.

“Starbucks, acting through its officers and directors, crafted and publicized these policies with fanfare, preening over the supposed moral virtue their adoption signaled,” NCPPR declared in the lawsuit.

“The individual Defendants took these actions despite knowing of a glaring, inconvenient fact: the policies they so trumpeted flagrantly violate a wide array of state and federal civil rights laws,” the conservative organization added.

Some of the Starbucks policies that the lawsuit alluded to include the aim of at least 30% of its US corporate workforce being black, indigenous, or people of color by 2025. In addition, it would tie executive compensation to workforce diversity quotas.

Prior to its lawsuit, the organization warned Starbucks that its anti-white policies were illegal and that their implementation constituted a legal risk for Starbucks shareholders. NCPPR called on Starbucks to tackle these risks head on and publicly distance itself from the policies.

Starbucks responded in July 2022 that it would “take no relevant action to correct course and reduce the exposure they had created for it and its shareholders,” according to the NCPPR complaint, motivating the group to file the lawsuit.In its lawsuit, NCPPR asserted that, by failing to scrap its anti-white policies, Starbucks put the interests of all its shareholders in peril and infringed on their fiduciary obligations.

“Why do they do so? Because it benefits them personally to pose as virtuous advocates of ‘Inclusion, Diversity, and Equity,’ even if it harms the company and its owners—a classic example of (admittedly non-pecuniary) self-dealing,” the group asserted in the complaint.

Judge Bastian ended up rejecting these assertions and on August 11 threw out the case with prejudice, per a court filing. In other words, NCPPR can’t refile the lawsuit.

The judge declared that the lawsuit was focused on public policy matters that are for elected officials and corporations to implement, not the courts.

“If the plaintiff doesn’t want to be invested in ‘woke’ corporate America, perhaps it should seek other investment opportunities rather than wasting this court’s time,” the judge declared.

Such a court ruling will only ingrain anti-white policies in corporate America. It’s not just the managerial regime that’s implementing these policies. Corporations are willingly becoming Pinkertons for the anti-white managerial regime. 

It’s time for the Right to recognize that the private sector is not innocent by default. In fact, it can willingly carry out the regime’s agenda albeit in a privatized manner. 

In light of such developments, right-wing activists must be ready to use prudential state power to limit these corporate actors’ influence.

Our Latest Articles