Federal judge denies dismissal of racial discrimination lawsuit by white former employee against Seattle.

A‍ Lawsuit Against Seattle’s Mandatory Cultural Sensitivity Programs

A federal judge recently dismissed the city of​ Seattle’s motion to ‍dismiss ​a lawsuit filed ⁣by a white former city employee. The employee claims that the mandatory cultural​ sensitivity programs in the city constitute anti-white racial indoctrination.

The backlash against these types ​of training sessions has ⁢been growing in ⁤recent years, both in government⁣ and corporate settings. Many of ⁣these sessions are based on radical, unproven‍ academic theories, such as critical‍ race theory, which ⁣assumes that the United States ⁤is inherently racist ‌and that white ⁢Americans ⁢are‍ inherently racist.

The former city employee, Joshua Diemert, ⁤is suing Seattle ⁢for damages and to⁢ prevent the city ‌from treating individuals differently based on⁣ their race.

According to Mr. Diemert, his race became a burden while ⁤working⁤ for the city. He claims to have experienced discrimination and‍ harassment due to the city’s focus on race and supposed ​”white supremacy.” He also alleges that he was consistently treated worse than his colleagues who were black, indigenous, or people‌ of color.

Mr. Diemert recalls a city manager asking him, ​”What could a⁣ straight white male possibly offer our department?” ​He‍ was also told by a senior ⁤employee ​that⁤ it ​was “impossible to be racist toward​ white people.” In addition, he‍ attended a workshop where​ he was told that “white people are like‌ the devil,” “racism⁤ is in white people’s DNA,” and “white people are‌ cannibals.”

The city argued that Mr. Diemert’s⁢ claims were weak and should be dismissed. However, Judge Jamal Whitehead of the U.S. District Court for the District of Washington disagreed.

On Aug. 28, Judge Whitehead denied the city’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s racially ⁢hostile work environment ⁣claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Washington Law Against Discrimination. He also allowed the plaintiff’s equal protection, disparate treatment, and retaliation claims to proceed. The judge disallowed older claims due to being brought ⁢too late.

‘Proceeding Towards His Day in Court’

Laura ‌D’Agostino, an attorney from the Pacific ⁤Legal Foundation (PLF) representing ⁢Mr. ⁣Diemert, sees⁤ the ruling as a victory.⁣ PLF is a‌ national public‍ interest law​ firm that challenges government abuses.

D’Agostino stated, “We’re confident that as we get through discovery and proceed in the case, these other claims will also be able to survive ultimately when the case goes before a jury.”

Mr. Diemert’s‍ story dates back to 2013 when he was hired by Seattle’s Human‌ Services Department. He received excellent work evaluations and even earned a prestigious award for ⁤his performance. However, as time went on, he claims to have ‌experienced harassment and racial discrimination ‍due to his resistance to the Race and Social Justice Initiative (RSJI).

The RSJI,⁢ led by the Seattle Office for Civil Rights, requires ⁢city​ employees to ​apply⁢ a “Racial Equity Toolkit”⁢ to every aspect of their work. For ⁣Mr. Diemert’s department, this meant‍ mandatory training sessions that promoted concepts such as “white privilege” and collective ⁢guilt ‍for societal inequities.

Mr. Diemert was‌ also pressured ⁢to join racial affinity groups that focused on ⁢matters of‍ race. The PLF claims that the⁢ race-related messages from these trainings spilled over into the workplace, with Mr. Diemert’s managers frequently repeating the ⁤initiative’s principles‌ and the city allegedly disseminating and encouraging racist messaging.