Earlier this month, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani stood at One Police Plaza and acknowledged that anti-Jewish hate crimes comprise more than half of all hate crimes in his city, even though Jews are only about 10% of the population. Yet when asked what message he wanted to send, he offered nothing more than a platitude about everyone belonging and everyone being cherished.
That gap between data and response is not merely political. It may become legal, and could become deadly.
Mamdani has staked his public safety reputation on precision policing, a data-driven strategy that deploys resources where the numbers point. It is a sensible approach, and the overall crime figures reflect it. But precision policing has a logical corollary: if the data shows one community absorbing 55% of hate crimes – more than five times their share of the population — a generic response is not neutral. When a strategy is explicitly driven by data about where crime is concentrated and who is being victimized, a deliberate decision to not respond with equivalent precision begins to look less like oversight and more like selective indifference. Mamdani’s approach presents three overlapping legal problems for the city.
The first is Equal Protection. Although the government may exercise discretion in enforcing the law, it violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment when a motivating factor in its failure to protect people from crime is invidious discrimination against a protected group, such as Jews or Israelis.
Mamdani’s public record already evinces a pattern and practice of such discrimination.
From the first days of his administration, Mamdani made a series of choices all pointing in the same direction: reduced protection for Jews and Israelis against rising antisemitic hate crimes. Mamdani deleted official statements about protecting Jewish New Yorkers, rescinded the city’s IHRA-based antisemitism order, and folded the Office for the Prevention of Hate Crimes into a broader Office of Community Safety. He also offers a constant drumbeat of anti-Israel propaganda, complete with false claims of genocide, apartheid, and racism, having the purpose and effect of fomenting hatred against both Jews and Israelis.
The Mayor insists that antisemitism be viewed in tandem with a purportedly equivalent threat to Muslims, his favored religious constituency, while touting a 140% rise in anti-Muslim hate crimes. But that is a false equivalence, reflecting deliberate indifference to the magnitude of the peril faced by Jews in New York. In the first quarter of 2026, Muslims were the targets of 12 (8.4%) confirmed hate crimes, representing an estimated 10% share of the population of New York City. The share of hate crimes did increase for Muslims, but from only five incidents in the first quarter of 2025. In all of 2025, according to the NYPD, Jews in New York were the victims of 324 hate crimes — over six per week — constituting 57.6% of the total, while 26 hate crimes targeted Muslims, 4.6% of the total. To insist that these are equivalent threats bespeaks sectarian bias not fairness.
The second problem for the city is municipal liability for that discriminatory failure to protect under Monell v. Department of Social Services. Under the Monell doctrine, a city can be sued directly when a constitutional violation flows from an official policy or custom. Monell cases are usually slow to build, because a pattern and practice of deliberate indifference usually takes a while to develop. Mamdani is an exception. He is constructing a record against the city, in public, in real time. Every statement minimizing antisemitism, every decision to dilute targeted protections, every press conference where he recites the numbers and then changes the subject, is a tile in the Monell mosaic. The evidentiary foundation for a Monell claim against the city is being delivered from the Mayor&#8217;s podium.
The third looming implication for the city is federal liability. Under 34 U.S.C. §12601, the Department of Justice has authority to investigate and sue local law enforcement agencies for engaging in a pattern or practice of conduct that deprives persons of constitutional rights. This statute has been used for decades to go after cities that over-police minority communities. There is no legal reason it cannot work in the opposite direction, against a city that systematically under-protects one. The federal government could also withdraw funding from the city for law enforcement programs (or even more broadly), or seek refunds of prior grants, on the grounds that the city is violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which applies to all federal grant recipients.
A formal complaint to the DOJ Civil Rights Division, grounded in the NYPD&#8217;s published hate crime data, calling for an investigation into New York City&#8217;s response to antisemitic hate crimes, would be unprecedented. It would also be legally sound. The data and public course of conduct by Mamdani are more than enough to suggest the sort of pattern and practice that warrants the federal scrutiny of an in-depth DOJ investigation.
Of course, the NYPD does not ignore these crimes entirely. Commissioner Tisch, to her credit, has often spoken about the issue. But when the policymaker at the top repeatedly signals that anti-Jewish targeting will be met with indifference and abstraction rather than attention and action or raises “concerns” about even modest efforts to stop protesters from besieging Jewish worshippers, or announces that if he cannot get the Commissioner to agree to dismantle the Strategic Response Group he will simply overrule her, that travels down the chain of command to impact how scenes are policed, and how cases are classified, investigated, prioritized, and deterred.
Nor must the legal record wait until the worst facts arrive. Thankfully, where plaintiffs can show a cognizable threat of ongoing unequal treatment, declaratory and injunctive remedies may be available before irreparable harm is inflicted. If we build the record now, there is still time for a course correction before even more crimes occur.
Mayor Mamdani said the numbers tell an indisputable story. He is right. The story they tell is that Jewish New Yorkers are the most targeted minority in the city he governs, that hate crimes are a rising threat, and that his response has been at best, generic, and at worst, corrosively hostile.
Equal protection means something. Monell means something. Federal authority over civil rights means something. The law does not wait for a mayor to get around to caring, and neither should we.
* * *
Dr. Mark Goldfeder is the CEO of the National Jewish Advocacy Center and a professor at Touro Law School.
Alan Scheiner is Senior Litigation Counsel at the National Jewish Advocacy Center.

New NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani Makes An Announcement In Brooklyn

The Numbers Tell One Story. The Mayor’s Response Tells Another

14th Amendment

antisemitism

Democratic Socialism

Discrimination

DW Opinion

Hate Crime

Israel

Jews

New York City

New York Police Department (NYPD)

Zohran Mamdani

Planned Parenthood’s Illinois chapter has agreed to pay $500,000 after the federal government investigated allegations that the branch discriminated against its white employees. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) said there is reasonable cause to believe the organization segregated its employees by race into “affinity networks.”
Many firms have “affinity networks,” which allow employees to join employee groups with those to whom they feel similar. However, at other companies, these networks are voluntary, not mandatory. Planned Parenthood had mandatory &#8220;affinity caucuses” segregated by race, and employees of other races were not allowed to participate.
Every week, staff were required to attend one- to two-hour sessions of segregated racial affinity caucuses or DEI training. At DEI training sessions, white employees were reportedly the target of harassment and derogatory statements such as: they “are white and do not feel racism the same way that non-white patients feel” and “white supremacy is exerted at every level of oppression.&#8221;
EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas said, “Segregating employees by race violates the core promise of our nation’s civil rights laws.” Lucas added in her statement that Title VII guarantees equal treatment for every employee and “those protections equally apply to white workers.”
Planned Parenthood employees alleged that the company even restricted the benefits of white employees. “Planned Parenthood also denied white employees access to time off that it granted only to black employees,” the report read. Along with the $500,000 settlement, Planned Parenthood fired the manager responsible for the misconduct that the investigation uncovered. The EEOC says the investigation was prompted after multiple employees brought forward their concerns.
The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.plannedparenthood.org/planned-parenthood-illinois/newsroom/statement-in-response-to-august-21-article-from-buzzfeed-news-statement-in-response-to-august-21-article-from-buzzfeed-news?utm_source=chatgpt.com">obtained</a> a press release from the Illinois Planned Parenthood affiliate that may have been the start of the organization’s discriminatory practices.
Planned Parenthood of Illinois said in a response to a BuzzFeed News article, &#8220;Despite not having the details of this particular incident, we recognize that Planned Parenthood has been complicit in upholding systemic racism. Moving forward, [Planned Parenthood of Illinois] is deeply committed to being anti-racist and ensuring that our work is not performative, that there is no divide between our words and actions.”
They added, “As part of this work, we’ve created spaces for honest conversations about race and are providing multiple channels through which staff have opportunities to share their lived experiences with leadership.”
The Illinois Planned Parenthood is not the only affiliate to release statements on racism in their organization. Nineteen out of the 49 Planned Parenthood affiliates have issued statements.
Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest said, “We must confront how white supremacy of the past and present continues in the institutions we are a part of today including our own organization.&#8221;
The Virginia affiliate said that they acknowledge “our past and our present participation in white supremacy and are committed to stopping, learning, growing and living our values through the hard and uncomfortable work of progress.”
None of the statements released by the Planned Parenthood chapters specifically addressed discrimination allegations against white employees or white patients.

Bill Tompkins  Planned Parenthood signage Archive

Planned Parenthood Chapter Hit With $500K Settlement Over Discrimination Against White Employees

Abortion

Courts

Lawsuit

Planned Parenthood

Racism

U.S.

Americans facing religious discrimination in the workplace have a new federal resource after the Department of Labor on Thursday launched its Center for Faith. 
The new <a href="https://www.dol.gov/agencies/faith">website</a> directs users to resources for addressing workplace discrimination based on religion, including guidance on filing complaints and information on support programs. 
“250 years ago, our nation was founded on the fundamental idea of liberty for all, including the right to religious freedom,” Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer told The Daily Wire. &#8220;The Trump administration is committed to upholding this core principle.&#8221;
“That&#8217;s why the Labor Department&#8217;s Center for Faith launched a new website, which provides clear assistance for anyone who has faced religious discrimination in the workplace,” she added.
The launch follows an <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/establishment-of-the-white-house-faith-office/">executive order</a> from President Donald Trump establishing a White House Office of Faith and directing federal agencies to expand resources for religious Americans. 
One of the tools included on the site is an <a href="https://www.dol.gov/agencies/faith/workforce-discrimination-resources-by-state#MT">interactive map</a> outlining state-level and federal options for individuals who believe they have experienced religious discrimination. The map also provides instructions on how to file complaints. 
<div class="image"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignnone size-full wp-image-1062561" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/Screenshot-2026-03-19-at-12.13.16-PM.png" alt="" width="1214" height="901" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/Screenshot-2026-03-19-at-12.13.16-PM.png 1214w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/Screenshot-2026-03-19-at-12.13.16-PM-300x223.png 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/Screenshot-2026-03-19-at-12.13.16-PM-776x576.png 776w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/Screenshot-2026-03-19-at-12.13.16-PM-768x570.png 768w" sizes=" (max-width: 1214px) 100vw, 1214px" /></div>
The website also <a href="https://www.dol.gov/agencies/faith/grants">lays out</a> how religious groups can apply for Department of Labor grants and partner with the agency on initiatives addressing poverty, substance use recovery, and community revitalization. 
“This guidance reflects the Administration&#8217;s commitment to protecting religious liberty, promoting economic opportunities, and fostering partnerships that build upon the documented successes of faith groups in serving Americans in need,” the website says. 
Last year, the Labor Department <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/exclusive-scrapping-bidens-dei-labor-department-restores-faith-back-into-grant-process" target="_blank" rel="noopener">welcomed</a> back faith-based organizations to the federal grant process after President Joe Biden sidelined them in favor of DEI-focused groups. 
The website also includes guidance for smaller faith-based organizations on structuring retirement plans. 
“As you work to select and offer a retirement plan for your employees, you may face certain decision points that secular employers do not,” the website says. “You may also find that while there are many strong service providers who help small employers in this process, there are fewer who have experience specifically helping faith-based employers.”

Key Speakers At Ford Pro Accelerate

Labor Department Launches ‘Center For Faith’ Resources To Combat Religious Discrimination

Department of Labor

Lori Chavez-deRemer

Religious Liberty

Trump Administration

The national chain Smoothie King has issued an official response to a viral video that appears to show a customer wearing pro-Trump apparel being refused service at one of its locations, saying the employees involved have been fired.
It all started when TikTok user @enl1986 posted a video that appeared to show two employees refusing to take an order from a man she identified as her husband, Jake. 
The stated reason for the refusal of service was that Jake was wearing a sweatshirt with Trump’s name on it.
The interaction reportedly occurred at a Smoothie King location in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
“As a brand, Smoothie King is committed to ensuring our stores are a place free of discrimination of any kind, where every guest and team member is treated with care and respect,” a <a href="https://x.com/SmoothieKing/status/2028689603314458713">statement</a> from the company said. “Following an investigation into an incident involving a guest who was refused service at a franchised location in Michigan yesterday, the franchise owner has taken immediate action and the two employees involved are no longer with the business.” 
The company added that both the franchise owner and corporate representatives had reached out to the guest multiple times to apologize and would continue to follow up. It also said the local owner will implement &#8220;mandatory retraining&#8221; for all employees.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
location in Michigan yesterday, the franchise owner has taken immediate action and the two employees involved are no longer with the business. Both the franchise owner and Smoothie King corporate have reached out to the guest several times to apologize and will continue to follow
— Smoothie King (@SmoothieKing) <a href="https://twitter.com/SmoothieKing/status/2028617911451930774?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 2, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
In the video, the woman can be heard telling the employees, “We were just wanting a smoothie and you literally looked at us and I asked you if everything was OK and you said: ‘We don’t feel comfortable serving you’ because of my husband’s hoodie. That is discrimination.&#8221;
One of the employees responded, &#8220;OK, well, have a great day.&#8221; 
&#8220;That is illegal,&#8221; the woman replied. A second employee then chimed in, saying, &#8220;I said, &#8216;Trump discriminates [against] us.'&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Woman claims Smoothie King in Michigan wouldn’t serve them because her husband was wearing a Trump hoodie
Any comment <a href="https://twitter.com/SmoothieKing?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SmoothieKing</a>?? <a href="https://t.co/ASmMBDE7gG">pic.twitter.com/ASmMBDE7gG</a>
— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) <a href="https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/2028398745184817217?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 2, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“That has nothing to do with us getting a smoothie,&#8221; the woman recording said. An employee responded, &#8220;OK, well, that’s who you support, though, that’s who you love.&#8221;
Later in the video, the woman recording added, &#8220;What’s embarrassing is that we’re American citizens and I wanted to get a smoothie.&#8221; 
At one point, an employee said the store had the &#8220;right to refuse service,” while the man accompanying her described the service refusal as a “crime.” 
The exchange quickly sparked debate on social media, with users divided over whether the employees had the right to refuse service.
“You can be denied service for any reason the retailer decides, it&#8217;s that simple, it doesn&#8217;t matter if the customer is wearing a Trump or Biden hat,” one user <a href="https://x.com/L0rdMoore/status/2028430837432119715">insisted</a>.
Others compared the situation to the infamous Masterpiece Cakeshop case, in which a Colorado bakery owner declined to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, a dispute that reached the Supreme Court.

Smoothie King

Smoothie King Refused To Serve Customer In Trump Hoodie, Employees Face Consequences

Business

Conservatives

Donald Trump

Michigan

Social Issues

The Trump administration asked a federal court on Wednesday to compel Nike to produce information on its diversity, equity, and inclusion goals as the athletic footwear and apparel giant faces allegations that it discriminated against white employees.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission said in a court filing that it is investigating allegations that Nike discriminated against white workers and job applicants to carry out its DEI objectives. The federal government said that Nike also faces accusations of &#8220;disparate treatment against white employees&#8221; in layoff decisions.
Nike refused to comply with a subpoena asking for the information, according to the commission, which has now filed an enforcement action in a federal court. The commission is asking the court to force Nike to hand over information going back to 2018, and especially wants to look into the criteria Nike has used to select people for layoffs.
“When there are compelling indications, including corporate admissions in extensive public materials, that an employer’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion-related programs may violate federal prohibitions against race discrimination or other forms of unlawful discrimination, the EEOC will take all necessary steps—including subpoena enforcement actions—to ensure the opportunity to fully and comprehensively investigate,” <a href="https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/eeoc-files-subpoena-enforcement-action-against-nike">said</a> Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Chair Andrea Lucas.
A Nike spokesman told The Daily Wire that the federal government&#8217;s action on Wednesday &#8220;feels like a surprising and unusual escalation.&#8221;
&#8220;We have had extensive, good-faith participation in an EEOC inquiry into our personnel practices, programs, and decisions and have had ongoing efforts to provide information and engage constructively with the agency,&#8221; the spokesman added. &#8220;We have shared thousands of pages of information and detailed written responses to the EEOC’s inquiry and are in the process of providing additional information.&#8221;
Conservative law firm America First Legal filed a civil rights <a href="https://aflegal.org/press-release/america-first-legal-slams-nike-files-federal-civil-rights-complaint-for-alleged-racial-and-sex-discrimination-against-white-males/">complaint</a> with the commission in January 2024, highlighting how the company has pushed race- and gender-based hiring practices. In 2025, Nike aimed to have half of its global corporate workforce made up of women, and 35% of its U.S. corporate workforce made up of racial minorities.
Nike has also stated that its &#8220;Employee Networks&#8221; support racial minorities, women, and LGBT people, but noticeably missing from the company&#8217;s web page on fostering an &#8220;inclusive community&#8221; was any mention of straight white men.
The Nike spokesman told The Daily Wire that it remains &#8220;committed to fair and lawful employment practices and follow all applicable laws, including those that prohibit discrimination.&#8221;
&#8220;We believe our programs and practices are consistent with those obligations and take these matters seriously,&#8221; the company added. &#8220;We will continue our attempt to cooperate with the EEOC and will respond to the petition.&#8221;
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission said its investigation into Nike is part of a &#8220;renewed &#8230; focus on evenhanded enforcement of Title VII,&#8221; which prohibits employers from discriminating based on race, religion, or sex.
“Title VII’s prohibition of race-based employment discrimination is colorblind and requires the EEOC to protect employees of all races from unlawful employment practices,&#8221; the commission added.
In recent years, multiple companies and organizations have faced scrutiny over allegations that they have discriminated against white people, especially white men. In 2023, NASCAR <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/nascar-takes-down-blatantly-illegal-racial-requirement-for-internship-after-daily-wire-report">removed</a> a racial requirement that discriminated against white applicants in an intern program following a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/blatantly-illegal-nascar-bans-white-applicants-from-diversity-internship">Daily Wire report</a>.
The Supreme Court <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-unanimously-rules-in-favor-of-straight-woman-in-reverse-discrimination-lawsuit?author=Spencer+Lindquist&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=undefined&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Supreme+Court+Unanimously+Rules+In+Favor+Of+Straight+Woman+In+%E2%80%98Reverse+Discrimination%E2%80%99+Lawsuit">ruled</a> last summer in favor of a white woman who sued after alleging that she was denied a promotion and demoted for being straight, while both the person who received the promotion and took her old job identified as LGBT. The ruling ensured that white and straight people could sue for discrimination without being forced to meet a higher burden of proof.

Nike

Feds Investigate Nike Over Claims Of Discrimination Against White Employees

Feds Investigate Nike For Alleged Discrimination Against White Employees

anti-white

A Vassar College student says administrators ignored concerns from Christian students and allowed a student burlesque group to mock their faith in a sexual performance in the campus chapel.
Sydney, a Vassar sophomore granted anonymity for this story, told The Daily Wire she first learned about the event when a friend showed her the flyer for a performance titled “Whoreship &amp; Prayer.” The show was produced by Vassar Burlesque, a student group that regularly puts on sexual and drag performances.
“I found the flyer … and I was disgusted immediately,” Sydney said. “The imagery and name of the show made it [clear] &#8230; it was definitely a show that had a Christian theme … clearly mocking Christianity.”
&nbsp;
<div class="image"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="aligncenter size-large wp-image-1013635" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/burlesque-image-1-410x576.jpeg" alt="Burlesque image 1" width="410" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/burlesque-image-1-410x576.jpeg 410w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/burlesque-image-1-213x300.jpeg 213w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/burlesque-image-1-768x1080.jpeg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/burlesque-image-1-1093x1536.jpeg 1093w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/burlesque-image-1.jpeg 1264w" sizes=" (max-width: 410px) 100vw, 410px" /></div>
&nbsp;
Sydney emailed the dean of student living, the college president, and other administrators to explain exactly why Christian students believed the performance violated Vassar’s stated values of diversity and inclusion. She says she was then contacted by the Office of Institutional Equity, the department that handles identity-based complaints, including those pertaining to religion. She says she met with <a href="https://offices.vassar.edu/institutional-equity/2024/12/19/eoaa-welcomes-brian-van-brunt/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Brian Van Brun</a><a href="https://offices.vassar.edu/institutional-equity/2024/12/19/eoaa-welcomes-brian-van-brunt/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">t</a>, Vassar&#8217;s Institutional Equity and Title VI Coordinator.
Sydney said Van Brunt acknowledged the event was mocking religious imagery and allegedly admitted it would have been treated differently if Christians weren’t the ones being targeted.
“He basically said … it would be different if it were another religion,” Sydney said. Referring to comments students made on the anonymous social media platform Fizz, she said one hypothetical they talked about was if the flyer had referenced Allah. “If Allah was used … then it wouldn’t have been allowed. And he said, ‘Well, obviously that’s a different situation.’”
Sydney said Van Brunt floated the idea of making minor changes to the flyer, such as removing the image of the Virgin Mary or changing the event&#8217;s name, but even those were rejected by the administration. Despite the number of complaints from Christian students, the administration informed them the event would proceed with no modifications.
&nbsp;
<div class="image"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="aligncenter size-large wp-image-1013637" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/Burlesque-image-2-396x576.jpeg" alt="Burlesque image 2" width="396" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/Burlesque-image-2-396x576.jpeg 396w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/Burlesque-image-2-206x300.jpeg 206w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/Burlesque-image-2-768x1117.jpeg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/Burlesque-image-2-1056x1536.jpeg 1056w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/Burlesque-image-2.jpeg 1249w" sizes=" (max-width: 396px) 100vw, 396px" /></div>
&nbsp;
“Whoreship and Prayer” sold out both nights, <a href="https://miscellanynews.org/2025/12/04/arts/whoreship-and-prayer-burlesque-is-a-religious-experience/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">according to</a> Vassar’s student newspaper, The Miscellany News. In its coverage, the paper described the November performances as a fusion of religious motifs with sexual choreography.
The Miscellany noted some of the acts, including routines called “Touched by the Holy Spirit,” “Red Sea,” and “Blasphemy.”
Muse, one of the group’s co-presidents, told The Miscellany the show explored “the relationship between sexuality and religion — human intersectionalities that exist in a chaotic harmony.” She added, “I grew up very religious … my spirituality is still a huge part of my life, but the relationship between my body, sexuality and my spirituality has always been a bit of a struggle to untangle.”
&nbsp;
<div class="image"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="aligncenter size-large wp-image-1013639" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/Burlesque-image-3-446x576.jpeg" alt="Burlesque image 3" width="446" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/Burlesque-image-3-446x576.jpeg 446w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/Burlesque-image-3-232x300.jpeg 232w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/Burlesque-image-3-768x993.jpeg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/Burlesque-image-3-1188x1536.jpeg 1188w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/Burlesque-image-3.jpeg 1264w" sizes=" (max-width: 446px) 100vw, 446px" /></div>
&nbsp;
Reached for comment, Van Brunt referred The Daily Wire to Victoria Grantham, the vice president for communications, who declined to comment.
Sydney said the Vassar Burlesque group also mocked the backlash from Christian students online, posting memes and celebratory images that used nun costumes, Bibles, and crosses as ironic props. “They actually posted like a tweet … to mock the fact that we were complaining,” Sydney said.
The college sophomore said this was not the first time she saw bias against Christians on campus, but it was the most blatant.
“It made me feel uncomfortable, and I had already felt uncomfortable as a Christian,” she said. “I had heard little comments … little jabs at Christianity before, but I had never seen something this blatantly inappropriate and blatantly hurtful.”
This incident has convinced her that the school’s commitment to “inclusion” does not apply equally.
“They’re outright saying, well, if you are a Christian, you don’t have the same rights as other religions … everyone except you kind of thing. I felt very ostracized.”
The Vassar Chapel continues to host worship nights, Christmas services, and religious gatherings, yet Vassar maintains that it is a “secular space.”
Sydney said that the explanation does not resolve the larger problem: the selective enforcement of respect for religion. “Hopefully, if we bring more attention to it, then it won’t have to be this way forever,” she told The Daily Wire.

Vassar story

Woke New York College Allowed Burlesque Troupe To Mock Christianity In Campus Chapel

Vassar Approved Burlesque Mocking Christianity But Not Other Faiths, Student Claims

Christianity

College

Religion

A lengthy exposé highlighting the negative effects DEI has had on white males, in particular millennials, has gone mega viral on social media.
The Compact <a href="https://www.compactmag.com/article/the-lost-generation/">piece</a> “The Lost Generation” by Jacob Savage goes into detail about how white men have been discriminated against over the past decade, especially in the fields of entertainment and academia. The statistical truths laid out plainly have struck a chord with the general public, leading to the article being viewed on X more than 11 million times.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Beginning in 2014, prestige industries decided they urgently needed to diversify. They didn’t purge established Boomers. Instead, they did everything possible to avoid hiring white millennial men.
This is the story of a generation derailed by DEI. <a href="https://t.co/kUfmpHfaMH">https://t.co/kUfmpHfaMH</a>
— Matthew Schmitz (@matthewschmitz) <a href="https://twitter.com/matthewschmitz/status/2000556991375409159?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 15, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Savage, who tried to make it as a Hollywood writer, reported that in 2011, “white men were 48 percent of lower-level TV writers; by 2024, they accounted for just 11.9 percent.” He further noted that The Atlantic’s editorial staff “went from 53 percent male and 89 percent white in 2013 to 36 percent male and 66 percent white in 2024.” Also, “white men fell from 39 percent of tenure-track positions in the humanities at Harvard in 2014 to 18 percent in 2023.”
The author points to the death of George Floyd as a major turning point for industries that were already trying to “diversify.”
“In 2021, new hires at Condé Nast were just 25 percent male and 49 percent white; at the California Times, parent company of The Los Angeles Times and The San Diego Union-Tribune, they were just 39 percent male and 31 percent white. That year ProPublica hired 66 percent women and 58 percent people of color; at NPR, 78 percent of new hires were people of color,” he wrote.
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible c-link--underline" href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=christmas&amp;utm_content=christmassale25" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=christmas&amp;utm_content=christmassale25" data-sk="tooltip_parent">Christmas Sale – Get 40% off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>
A hiring manager told Savage, “For a typical job we’d get a couple hundred applications, probably at least 80 from white guys. It was a given that we weren’t gonna hire the best person. … It was jarring how we would talk about excluding white guys.”
White male writers have been kept out of other major outlets, too, including The New York Times and Buzzfeed. The article noted that Vox Media was 82 percent male and 88 percent white in 2013. By 2022, the company was just 37 percent male and 59 percent white, and by 2025 leadership was 73 percent female.
Savage said while the problem looks less stark in academia, he believes that Boomers are occupying all the tenure positions at elite institutions while millennial white men are being ignored for jobs they’re qualified for.
One notable statistic Savage found was that since 2022, Brown University “has hired forty-five tenure track professors in the humanities and social sciences. Just three were white American men (6.7 percent).”
The article points out similar situations in other industries, such as tech, publishing, and management. Savage notes how white men were pushed to crypto, podcasting, and Substack because “institutional barriers to entry didn’t exist” there.
His exposé was met with support and commiseration on social media.
“The phenomenon of white male dispossession strikes at the core of what’s been going on over the last decade,” one commenter <a href="https://x.com/l0m3z/status/2000976625585021212?s=43">wrote</a>. “Any politician, anyone with any ambition to influence, must take on this fight. The time is now.”
“Truly extraordinary,” <a href="https://x.com/l0m3z/status/2000976625585021212?s=43">said</a> another. “Impossible to fathom all that&#8217;s been lost.”
Some argued that Savage’s piece didn’t go far enough and that it placed too much blame on the established Boomers who were also subject to discrimination.
“People complaining about the rise of radicalism need to realize the number one thing they could do to contain it is to speak up,” political commentator Jeremy Carl <a href="https://x.com/realJeremyCarl/status/2000933766118957247">wrote</a>.

Man is standing

Exposé On Discrimination Against White Millennial Men Goes Viral, Inspires Outrage

Journalism

Twitter

White Men

Pennsylvania Democratic Governor Josh Shapiro headed to a West Philadelphia hair salon to sign a bill that would prohibit “hair discrimination” in the state.
The CROWN Act, which stands for &#8220;Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair,&#8221; explicitly calls for protections for &#8220;natural&#8221; hairstyles, including locs, braids, twists, afros, and more. The legislation passed the state Senate with a 44-3 vote.
&#8220;Real freedom means being respected for who you are — no matter what you look like, where you come from, who you love, or who you pray to,” Shapiro <a href="https://www.pa.gov/governor/newsroom/2025-press-releases/governor-shapiro-signs-crown-act-into-law">said</a>. &#8220;For too long, many Pennsylvanians have faced discrimination simply for hairstyles that reflect their identity and culture — that ends today.&#8221;
House Speaker Joanna McClinton and U.S. Democratic Rep. La’Tasha D. Mayes have been working to get the CROWN Act implemented since 2019. 
Both women said the motivations were personal. 
&#8220;I never wore braids from law school to being a public defender for seven years in this city, because I always had a perception that it would not be respected,&#8221; McClinton said. &#8220;They will not look at your hair and say you cannot work here. They will not look at your hair and say you do not belong.&#8221; 
&#8220;Hair discrimination has taken confidence from our children, but that ends today,&#8221; Mayes added. &#8220;Hair discrimination has taken dignity from workers, but that ends today. It has taken access to economic opportunities, hopes and dreams, but that begins to end today.&#8221;
The CROWN Act was introduced in the House of Representatives in 2021 and was approved in 2023. It was reintroduced in both the House and Senate last year, but has not passed.
Twenty-eight other states have similar legislation on the books.
Black hair has been a hot topic of conversation lately, especially during former first lady Michelle Obama’s book tour. 
Obama said that black women are “trapped” by societal pressure regarding their looks and feel compelled to keep their hair straight, meaning they can’t participate in everyday activities.
“Let me explain something to white people. Our hair comes out of our head naturally in a curly pattern,” the 61-year-old said earlier this month. “When we straighten it to follow your beauty standards, we are trapped by the straightness.”
“That’s why so many of us can’t swim, and we run away from the water. People won’t go to the gym because we’re trying to keep our hair straight for y’all! It’s exhausting, expensive and takes up so much time.”
Obama concluded by effusively telling society to “get out of&#8221; her hair.
“So why do we need an act … an act of law to get white folks out of our hair? Don’t tell me how to wear my hair. Don’t wonder about it. Don’t touch it. Just don’t. It just is.”
RELATED: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/california-becomes-first-state-ban-racial-hair-jeffrey-cawood">California Becomes The First State To Ban Racial &#8216;Hair Discrimination&#8217; Against Braids, Cornrows, And Dreadlocks</a>

Josh Shapiro

Pennsylvania Democratic Governor Signs Bill Banning ‘Hair Discrimination’

Pennsylvania Governor Signs Bill Prohibiting 'Hair Discrimination'

Beauty

Pennsylvania

Politics

Racial Discrimination

The NFL’s first transgender-identifying cheerleader has been let go from the squad and is now blaming the organization for discriminating against him.
Justine Lindsay, who was previously a member of the Carolina Panthers squad, left the team in August after cheering for the organization since 2022, <a href="https://www.out.com/gay-athletes/justine-lindsay-nfl-transgender-fired">per</a> Out Magazine.
“I was cut because I’m trans. I don’t wanna hear nobody saying, ‘She didn’t wanna come back.’ Why the hell would I not wanna come back to an organization that I’ve been a part of for three years,” Lindsay told Gaye Magazine during an Instagram livestream, adding that he still has Panther pride despite the alleged discriminatory firing.
“I love them down. I appreciate everything that they’ve done for me, but I feel like I was done wrong,” he added. “It was like a big slap in the face to not only me, but for the youth. And this was right after Trump became president.”
“I was devastated. It stung. I was hurt,” he added.
The Carolina Panthers did not immediately respond to The Daily Wire’s request for comment.
Lindsay is planning to compete in the Miss International Queen pageant for trans-identifying men next year, and mentioned that during a statement ahead of this year’s NFL season.
Right now, DailyWire+ annual memberships are fifty percent off during our Black Friday sale. Join now at <a href="http://dailywire.com/blackfriday" target="_blank" rel="noopener">dailywire.com/blackfriday</a>.
&#8220;For now, I’m focusing on my pageantry work and community involvement, striving to be recognized not just as an NFL cheerleader, but as someone making a positive impact, especially during these uncertain times,&#8221; he said in a statement in August.
&#8220;Being in the NFL was a stepping stone to get me where I need to be, and God is blessing me each and every day, giving me the breath to do the work and change lives. My focus is to educate and uplift the younger generation of leaders to focus on their dreams and goals. Don&#8217;t let a president who is delusional stop them from reaching their goals, whether they are trans, African American, not American, etc.&#8221;
Male cheerleaders became a topic of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/fan-backlash-against-male-nfl-cheerleaders-intensifies-vikings-issue-statement">debate</a> ahead of this year’s NFL season as several were featured in promo videos for various teams, including the Minnesota Vikings.

Justine Lindsay

NFL’s First Ever ‘Trans’ Cheerleader Fired, Cries Discrimination: ‘Cut Because I’m Trans’

NFL's First Ever 'Trans' Cheerleader Fired, Cries Discrimination: 'Cut Because I'm Trans'

Cheerleaders

Football

North Carolina

Transgender

Comedian Wanda Sykes is being dragged for saying the quiet part out loud and admitting she will choose job candidates based on their race and gender.
The 61-year-old celebrity proudly made the admission last week at Variety’s Power of Women event in Los Angeles.
“My joy is when I’m able to hire somebody. And you know who I like to hire? Women. … I’ll be upfront with you. When it comes to a position and I look on the paper — she might be right here, and he’s up there,” Sykes said, indicating with her hands that the man was in a slightly elevated position compared to the woman. 
She went on, “I’m hiring the woman. That’s just how I operate. And I’ll be honest with you, if she’s a black woman — oh, pssh. Girl, you got the job.”
The crowd gave her a big round of applause for acknowledging her bias.
“When women thrive, the community thrives,” Sykes added, before throwing in a punch line. “We make everyone around us better. When you get women, when we win, everybody wins. When men win, sometimes they get a younger wife.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Wanda Sykes says she prefers not to hire a man or white person <a href="https://t.co/2zioWv2wjS">pic.twitter.com/2zioWv2wjS</a>
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) <a href="https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1984330496114114707?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 31, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“What I plan on doing is to continue to create projects — and even in my stand-up — to speak and represent more of what powerful women can do. We’re at a moment in time where, with everything that’s going on in the government, we need to create projects where life imitates art,” she continued. 
Join us now during our exclusive Deal of the Decade. Get everything for $7 a month. Not as fans. As fighters. Go to <a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">DailyWire.com/Subscribe</a> to join now.
“Looking at what’s happening with cutting SNAP benefits; that’s going to affect single mothers. I want to do things that speak to them and uplift them. … Use your power to uplift women. If we did that, and if that’s the way we moved, we would have two female presidents by now.”
Social media commenters blasted Sykes for bragging about discriminating in her hiring practices.
“Haha cool this is totally illegal,” conservative commentator Megyn Kelly <a href="https://x.com/megynkelly/status/1984372349215658407?s=43">replied</a>. 
“Why do people think it’s OK to be so blatantly racist and sexist?” another account <a href="https://x.com/OneHegemony/status/1984372640170271192">posted</a>.
“Where&#8217;s the outrage from the left who cry ‘racism’ at the drop of the hat?” echoed a third.

Wanda Sykes

Wanda Sykes Brags About Her Hiring Bias: ‘If She’s A Black Woman, Girl You Got The Job’

Wanda Sykes Brags About Her Hiring Bias: 'If She's A Black Woman, Girl You Got The Job'

Bias

Celebrities

Racial Bias

Women

For Uber, it’s time to get either new lawyers or new executives, because its new “Women Preferences” policy is obvious sex discrimination that violates the law. If we owned stock in the company, we’d sell it to avoid a loss from the big-dollar lawsuits that are sure to ensue for this ham-fisted “equity” scheme.
Recently, Uber <a href="https://www.uber.com/newsroom/women-preferences/">announced</a> that in the interests of making its “platform better for women,” it is implementing a “Women Preferences” pilot program that will give women riders &#8220;more ways to choose rides with women drivers&#8221; and women drivers the option “to request trips with women riders, including during peak earning hours like evenings.” In other words, Uber will be empowering its drivers to ignore, that is, discriminate against, male riders. Kind of reminds one of a time when taxi drivers all too often sped up and drove past black residents trying to hail them for a ride. Now, such conduct is prohibited by law.
The only difference between the racist taxi drivers of old and the sexist Uber drivers of new is that the digital “drive-by” discrimination is based on sex instead of race. But both are prohibited under the law.
Uber’s announcement claims this new policy is “designed to give women riders and drivers more choice, more confidence, and more flexibility.” However, “more choice, more confidence, and more flexibility” does not provide a company with a license to violate state and federal anti-discrimination laws.
Uber also brags in its announcement that it started this program in, of all places, Saudi Arabia. You know, one of the world’s most discriminatory countries, where women are treated as second-class citizens.
Yes, you read that right. Uber started its “Women Preferences” pilot program in the unenlightened Middle Eastern nation only after Saudi Arabia finally gave women the right to drive in 2019. That’s a remarkable delay, given that the first woman to be <a href="https://transportationhistory.org/2022/03/02/women-in-transportation-history-anne-rainsford-french-bush-automotive-pioneer/">issued</a> a driver’s license in the District of Columbia (Anne Rainsford French) received it in 1900. But what more would one expect from a nation that didn’t grant women the right to vote for the <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35075702">first time</a> until 2015?
Uber’s lawyers seem to need a refresher on the law.
As a company incorporated in California, Uber is subject to the state’s <a href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&amp;sectionNum=51">Unruh Civil Rights Act</a>, which prohibits discrimination by all business establishments open to the public in California. Among others, it applies to hotels, restaurants, stores, theaters, taxis, and yes, rideshare companies like Uber and Lyft. California-based businesses that serve the public must treat everyone equally — regardless of their race, religion, sex, or disability, among other protected characteristics.
What’s more, federal law — the <a href="https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/civil-rights-act">Civil Rights Act of 1964</a> — prohibits discrimination in public accommodations as well. And while sex is not a protected category under Title II of the Civil Rights Act (like race is), Title VII of that same Act prohibits sex discrimination and harassment in employment contexts. That means that male Uber drivers who are not provided with the same sex-selective rider options as their female colleagues may have a claim for discriminatory treatment under that federal law, as well.
This isn’t the first time that the rideshare company has been accused of violating civil rights law. In 2017, Uber <a href="https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/uber-pay-44-million-resolve-eeoc-sexual-harassment-and-retaliation-charge#:~:text=The%20pre%2Dlitigation%20agreement%20was,retaliation%20after%20January%201%2C%202014.">agreed</a> to pay out $4.4 million in fees to settle a class-action lawsuit charging that the company had failed to adequately address sexual harassment by its drivers against female passengers. The same year, Uber software engineer Susan Fowler wrote a blog post that went viral in which she <a href="https://time.com/5784464/susan-fowler-book-uber-sexual-harassment/">accused</a> the Silicon Valley-based company of sex discrimination and harassment — both violations of Title VII.
And in 2021, the U.S. Department of Justice sued Uber, alleging that the company had violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by charging wait time fees to riders with disabilities who took longer to get in Uber vehicles. Uber eventually agreed to <a href="https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/uber-commits-changes-and-pays-millions-resolve-justice-department-lawsuit-overcharging-people#:~:text=(Uber)%20to%20resolve%20a%20lawsuit,discriminatory%20fees%20due%20to%20disability.">settle</a> the lawsuit, and paid millions in compensation to affected riders.
Uber’s new policy also allows riders to “select the ‘Women Drivers’ option when requesting a ride.”
If you want to avoid a taxi, bus, train, or airplane because you don’t like the race or sex of the driver or pilot, you can do that. While that might evidence questionable moral beliefs, it doesn’t violate state or federal law — after all, consumers exercise preference in the market all the time. But the private companies and local governments who own those taxis, buses, trains, and airplanes cannot engage in the same type of discriminatory “preferencing.”
Uber is rolling out this program in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Detroit, and says it is doing so “after extensive testing and feedback from global markets like Saudi Arabia, Germany, and France, where women-only options have been well received.”
Uber’s conduct in “global markets like Saudi Arabia” is blatantly illegal in the United States, regardless of whether it’s “well received” or not.
* * *
Hans von Spakovsky is a Senior Legal Fellow at the Heritage Foundation and former Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the U.S. Justice Department.
Sarah Parshall Perry is the Vice President and Legal Fellow of Defending Education and former counsel to the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Education.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Crowdsourced taxi driver talking to a passenger in the back seat

Uber’s New ‘Women Preferences’ Program Violates Civil Rights Law

Uber’s New 'Women Preferences' Program Violates Civil Rights Law

Civil Rights

Heritage Foundation

Saudi Arabia

Silicon Valley

Uber

Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division Harmeet Dhillon issued a blanket condemnation of universities across the country, averring that virtually none of them have acted in accordance with federal law regarding non-discrimination in admissions.
Dhillon and her law firm joined the Alliance Defending Freedom to represent The Daily Wire when it <a href="https://adflegal.org/case/daily-wire-v-occupational-safety-and-health-administration" target="_blank" rel="noopener">became</a> the first major company to file a lawsuit against the emergency vaccine mandate implemented by the Biden administration in 2021. Other groups later joined the case, which was consolidated into National Federation of Independent Business v. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of The Daily Wire and its fellow plaintiffs.
Dhillon <a href="https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2025/07/01/assistant-a-g-almost-every-school-violated-federal-discrimination-law/">said</a> with regard to Harvard University, “even if they never took a penny of federal funding again in the future, they’ve taken billions annually over the past many years. And so, the United States has jurisdiction over discrimination that has occurred during the time. And, to be very clear, every time a vendor like a university like Harvard takes federal money, they sign certifications saying that they’re compliant with federal law. Except they aren’t.”
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://get.dailywire.com/freedom/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=freedom&amp;utm_content=freedomeditorial&amp;_gl=1*r8odly*_gcl_au*MTQ5MDUzNjQ0NC4xNzQ1ODQ0MzMyLjEwNDAyMzM0NDQuMTc0NzY1MzIxNy4xNzQ3NjUzMjE3*_ga*MTM1OTk4Njg2NS4xNzA2NzE2NTAy*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*czE3NTEyOTIzMDQkbzMyJGcxJHQxNzUxMjkyOTI5JGo1NyRsMCRoMA.." target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-stringify-link="https://get.dailywire.com/freedom/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=freedom&amp;utm_content=freedomeditorial" data-sk="tooltip_parent" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-75638">JULY 4 SALE: Get Six Months Of DW+ Free</a>
“Almost no university in the United States has been compliant with federal law when it comes to anti-discrimination in admissions, and particularly the most elite ones,” she said, widening the argument. “They have quotas. They have discrimination. This sort of wave of antisemitism on American campuses, which I believe stems from foreign funding, but is absolutely allowed and exacerbated by callousness or even reckless disregard by these universities, is making life miserable for students, and the American government’s not going to put up with it. So, we have a choice as to where the federal money goes. And a minimum criterion is you can’t be in violation of federal law.”
According to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964<span data-ccp-props="{&quot;134233117&quot;:false,&quot;134233118&quot;:false,&quot;134245418&quot;:true,&quot;134245529&quot;:true,&quot;201341983&quot;:0,&quot;335551550&quot;:6,&quot;335551620&quot;:6,&quot;335559738&quot;:320,&quot;335559739&quot;:80,&quot;335559740&quot;:279}">, universities and colleges that receive federal financial aid are prohibited from discriminating on the basis of race, color, or national origin. A student cannot be prevented from any educational opportunities or subjected to discriminatory treatment based on their color or ethnicity. Those anti-discrimination laws are enforced by the Office for Civil Rights (OCR), a division of the U.S. Department of Education.
In 2019, the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP) released the results of a seven-year study into illicit funding of U.S. universities by foreign governments. The study <a href="https://isgap.org/follow-the-money/">found</a> “substantial Middle Eastern funding (primarily from Qatar) to US universities that had not been reported to the Department of Education. &#8230; ISGAP has uncovered and established that the foreign donations from Qatar, especially, have had a substantial impact on fomenting growing levels of antisemitic discourse and campus politics at US universities, as well as growing support for anti-democratic values within these institutions of higher education.”
ISGAP followed that report with another titled, “<a href="https://isgap.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Ongoing_Failure_Report_Yale.pdf">The Ongoing Failure to Report: Yale, Qatar, And Undisclosed Foreign Funding</a>.”

US-POLITICS-REPUBLICANS-RNC

DOJ Warns: Almost All U.S. Universities Are Breaking Federal Anti-Discrimination Laws

Menu