allen's, Comcast, discrimination, supreme court
The Supreme Court will hear arguments Nov. 13 in a $20 billion lawsuit Allen filed against Comcast. If Allen wins, it will become easier for black-owned businesses to bring and win civil rights lawsuits like his that allege discrimination in contracting. If Comcast wins, the applications of Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 will be limited. (Photo Credit: Chris Carlson/AP/Shutterstock)

Supreme Court to Hear Byron Allen’s Discrimination Case Against Comcast

Media Mogul and comedian Byron Allen’s Entertainment Studios Networks sued Comcast Corporation for refusing to carry any of the networks his company owns. Tomorrow, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear an appeal by the Comcast Corporation. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Allen’s favor, but Comcast (No. 6 on DiversityInc’s 2019 Top Companies for Diversity) appealed.

Allen claims Comcast’s refusal to air his networks was racially motivated, which violates Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The law says “all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right . . . to make and enforce contracts . . . as is enjoyed by white citizens.”

Comcast, on the other hand, says it did not discriminate against Allen or his companies based on race, but rather on what it believed viewers wanted. However, Allen alleges Comcast took on other channels owned by white people who had fewer viewers.

This case is much larger than Comcast and Allen. If Comcast wins, civil rights advocates are arguing, it will become more difficult for those who believe they are discriminated against across the board to sue using section 1981.  A decision in Comcast’s favor would mean race would have to be the sole reason for a company’s refusal to enter into a contract.

The Civil Rights Act of 1866 was passed during the Reconstruction era. Section 1981 — which Comcast is seeking to gut — allows plaintiffs to sue if they believe race played any role in a company’s decision to not enter into a contract with them.

The goal of Section 1981 was to give people of color the same rights to work, bank, shop, rent or buy a home and become entrepreneurs free from discrimination. Passed after slaves were freed, its applications meant to put Black Americans on the same level as whites, allowing them the same opportunities to work and build wealth.

Comcast denies it is seeking to roll back discrimination protections.

The question before the court will be whether race needs to be the solefactor in a refusal to enter into a contract for the incident to be considered discrimination, or whether it can be just one of the factors.

In October, the Lawyers’ Committee and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund filed separate briefs supporting Allen. They argue a “but-for” application of the law — meaning the defendant would have entered into a contract with the plaintiff “but for” their race — would restrict those wanting to bring up discrimination cases because they would have the burden of proving race was the only factor playing into their treatment. The briefs argue a “but-for” interpretation of the law does not appear in its text. Neither brief took a position on the merit of Allen’s claims.

The Trump administration filed a brief in support of Comcast, saying the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals was incorrect in deciding a plaintiff could win by proving racism was just one of the factors leading to a refusal enter into a contract.

Others say Allen’s claim of discrimination does not prove his race played any role in Comcast’s decision not to work with his companies. Comcastalso says it works with a number of minority-owned networks, including AFRO, CLEOTV and The Weather Channel, which Allen owns. Those against Allen — who is a billionaire — believe that his claims are frivolous and undermine other, less wealthy people’s discrimination claims.

Allen is seeking to sue Comcast for $20 billion.

Related Story: Congresswoman Joyce Beatty Grills Mark Zuckerberg on Facebook’s Civil Rights Practices

Latest News

Marriott International Celebrates 93 Years

Originally published on LinkedIn by Bill Marriott, Executive Chairman of the Board at Marriott International. I woke up like a child on Christmas this morning because today marks the 93rd anniversary of Marriott International. When I think back to how my newlywed parents, J.W. and Alice Marriott, started a small root…

Calm App Available to Kaiser Permanente Members at No Cost

Originally published on KaiserPermanente.org. The meditation and sleep app, part of Kaiser Permanente’s self-care portfolio, supports people looking for ways to manage stress and build resilience, particularly in uncertain times.  OAKLAND, Calif., May 19, 2020 — Kaiser Permanente announced it has added Calm, a leading app for mindfulness meditation and…

Hershey Stockholders Elect Victor L. Crawford To Company Board

Originally published on thehersheycompany.com. HERSHEY, Pa., May 18, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Hershey Company (NYSE: HSY) today announced the election of Victor L. Crawford to its board of directors. Crawford is the newest Hershey board member and was elected at the company’s recent Annual Stockholder’s Meeting. Victor L. Crawford Crawford brings deep executive and leadership experience to…