
Systemic Equality: Equal Access, Better Futures
Systemic Equality is A Racial Justice Agenda
Since our nation鈥檚 founding, discriminatory policies and laws have created an unequal system in which Black communities have had their civil rights and liberties denied and have been systematically locked out of opportunities in education, housing, employment and more.
Through our Systemic Equality agenda, the 红杏视频 will use nationwide litigation, advocacy, and public education to advance laws and policies rooted in racial equity and end discriminatory policies, laws, and practices that have an outsized impact on Black communities.
The 红杏视频 will also continue to evolve our own culture, systems, and processes to drive progress toward our internal racial justice commitments, including by committing sustained recruitment and hiring efforts to recruit more diverse talent pools, developing initiatives to promote and retain Black leadership, engaging Black-owned and Black-led businesses, and more.
When we have full and equal access to education, jobs, housing, voting rights, and more, better futures are possible.
A Spotlight on Fair Housing

Why Fair Housing is Key to Systemic Equality
Here鈥檚 how discrimination continues to impact access to housing today, and why we鈥檙e fighting to ensure all people have equal access.

Fair Housing
Our goal is to expand access to stable, affordable housing.
Historic and ongoing segregation and discrimination has prevented marginalized groups 鈥 particularly Black communities 鈥 from accessing safe, affordable housing and home ownership.
Equal access to housing is a civil right. We must work to reduce mass evictions and barriers to housing opportunities that disproportionately impact Black women renters, and restore important housing protections to expand equal access to housing opportunities for everyone.
Everyone deserves equal access to safe and stable housing.
Our fair housing work includes:
- Challenging Mass Evictions and Barriers to Housing Opportunities: Black women and their families make up the demographic group most likely to face eviction in the United States, resulting in a myriad of harms and reinforcing segregation. Our multi-part campaign includes securing the right to counsel in eviction cases, prohibiting the consideration of prior eviction records in tenant screening, and more.
- Advocating for the Right to Representation: We are engaged in right to representation campaigns in Delaware and New Jersey to ensure all people facing eviction have the ability to assert their rights in court.
Historic and ongoing segregation and discrimination has prevented marginalized groups 鈥 particularly Black communities 鈥 from accessing safe, affordable housing and home ownership.
Equal access to housing is a civil right. We must work to reduce mass evictions and barriers to housing opportunities that disproportionately impact Black women renters, and restore important housing protections to expand equal access to housing opportunities for everyone.
Everyone deserves equal access to safe and stable housing.
Our fair housing work includes:
- Challenging Mass Evictions and Barriers to Housing Opportunities: Black women and their families make up the demographic group most likely to face eviction in the United States, resulting in a myriad of harms and reinforcing segregation. Our multi-part campaign includes securing the right to counsel in eviction cases, prohibiting the consideration of prior eviction records in tenant screening, and more.
- Advocating for the Right to Representation: We are engaged in right to representation campaigns in Delaware and New Jersey to ensure all people facing eviction have the ability to assert their rights in court.

Voting Rights
Our goal is to expand voting access for and build the political power of Black communities.
Black people and communities of color, in particular, have faced numerous obstacles to meaningful participation in the political process, including the redistricting process. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibits the drawing of district lines that dilute the voting strength of communities of color. When Black people and communities of color are minimized through the redistricting process, they are not adequately represented in our democracy, perpetuating the systemic inequality many voters of colors already face.
Redistricting plans should fairly reflect the political strength of communities of color. As data from the last Census confirms, nearly all of the country鈥檚 growth over the past decade is attributable to the growth in our nation鈥檚 communities of color. Fair maps and voting policies must adequately reflect that reality.
The right to vote should be equally accessible to everyone.
Our voting rights work includes:
- Equal and Fair Political Representation: As part of our ongoing work to ensure legislatures reflect their constituencies and address the longstanding underrepresentation and disempowerment of Black communities, we will advocate for fair voting district maps in six priority states in the South to obtain more equal representation for Black voters.
Black people and communities of color, in particular, have faced numerous obstacles to meaningful participation in the political process, including the redistricting process. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibits the drawing of district lines that dilute the voting strength of communities of color. When Black people and communities of color are minimized through the redistricting process, they are not adequately represented in our democracy, perpetuating the systemic inequality many voters of colors already face.
Redistricting plans should fairly reflect the political strength of communities of color. As data from the last Census confirms, nearly all of the country鈥檚 growth over the past decade is attributable to the growth in our nation鈥檚 communities of color. Fair maps and voting policies must adequately reflect that reality.
The right to vote should be equally accessible to everyone.
Our voting rights work includes:
- Equal and Fair Political Representation: As part of our ongoing work to ensure legislatures reflect their constituencies and address the longstanding underrepresentation and disempowerment of Black communities, we will advocate for fair voting district maps in six priority states in the South to obtain more equal representation for Black voters.

Criminal Justice
Our goal is to improve public safety by investing in Black communities instead of punishment.
Investing in punishment while undermining what we need for equal and thriving communities has resulted in overcriminalization and the unjust and unequal treatment of our communities 鈥 especially Black communities.
We improve public safety by addressing root causes of crime, such as poverty and lack of opportunity, while also focusing on strengthening communities through investments in promising solutions. These include increasing access to affordable housing, jobs, education, health care, and mental health and substance use services in our communities. At the same time, we must work to reduce the number of people incarcerated, surveilled, and criminalized by law enforcement and in the courts. We must challenge dehumanizing conditions in jails and prisons and ensure that people returning to our communities are equipped for success. We must challenge cruel, extreme, and discriminatory punishments such as the death penalty and life without parole. We must work to erect meaningful constitutional guardrails on law enforcement 鈥 including jail and prison administrators.
We have the power to choose and to invest in real solutions that increase equality, justice, and safety for all of us.
Our criminal justice work includes:
- Challenging Policing: Part of a larger campaign to reimagine community safety that uses litigation and integrated advocacy to challenge racially-biased policing practices and advance community-based and non-punitive approaches to public safety.
- Shrinking the Geography of Mass Incarceration: An integrated effort, our litigation and advocacy will focus on developing legal challenges to stop funding for the expansion or construction of prisons, jails, and detention centers.
- Ending Racially Discriminatory Jury Selection in the Death Penalty: The jury selection process in death penalty trials, known as 鈥渄eath qualification,鈥 removes otherwise qualified jurors from serving in capital trials based on their opposition to the death penalty. The process discriminates against Black jurors, who are disproportionately opposed to the death penalty. The history of the death penalty in America is inextricably tied to the history of lynching, and the opposition to the death penalty within the Black community is rooted in that history. This disenfranchisement from jury service is a fresh injustice compounding the injustice of racial terror and violence.
Investing in punishment while undermining what we need for equal and thriving communities has resulted in overcriminalization and the unjust and unequal treatment of our communities 鈥 especially Black communities.
We improve public safety by addressing root causes of crime, such as poverty and lack of opportunity, while also focusing on strengthening communities through investments in promising solutions. These include increasing access to affordable housing, jobs, education, health care, and mental health and substance use services in our communities. At the same time, we must work to reduce the number of people incarcerated, surveilled, and criminalized by law enforcement and in the courts. We must challenge dehumanizing conditions in jails and prisons and ensure that people returning to our communities are equipped for success. We must challenge cruel, extreme, and discriminatory punishments such as the death penalty and life without parole. We must work to erect meaningful constitutional guardrails on law enforcement 鈥 including jail and prison administrators.
We have the power to choose and to invest in real solutions that increase equality, justice, and safety for all of us.
Our criminal justice work includes:
- Challenging Policing: Part of a larger campaign to reimagine community safety that uses litigation and integrated advocacy to challenge racially-biased policing practices and advance community-based and non-punitive approaches to public safety.
- Shrinking the Geography of Mass Incarceration: An integrated effort, our litigation and advocacy will focus on developing legal challenges to stop funding for the expansion or construction of prisons, jails, and detention centers.
- Ending Racially Discriminatory Jury Selection in the Death Penalty: The jury selection process in death penalty trials, known as 鈥渄eath qualification,鈥 removes otherwise qualified jurors from serving in capital trials based on their opposition to the death penalty. The process discriminates against Black jurors, who are disproportionately opposed to the death penalty. The history of the death penalty in America is inextricably tied to the history of lynching, and the opposition to the death penalty within the Black community is rooted in that history. This disenfranchisement from jury service is a fresh injustice compounding the injustice of racial terror and violence.

Economic Justice
Our goal is to reduce the racial wealth gap.
Systemic inequities and barriers keep people 鈥 particularly people of color 鈥 from accessing the mainstays of economic life; including education, employment, and homeownership; resulting in racial disparities in wealth and income. These disparities result from a combination of ongoing discrimination, structural inequality, and biases across our institutions, and emerge in new forms of technology, including through artificial intelligence, that influence nearly every facet of life.
Through litigation and advocacy, we aim to remedy deeply entrenched sources of inequality and ensure that access to opportunity and the ability to build wealth is available to all.
All people should have an equal opportunity to earn a living, find a home, and get an education.
Our economic justice work includes:
- Exposing Discriminatory Hiring and Lending Tech: Leveraging research and integrated advocacy, we will promote a more equitable approach to AI policy and expose and stop the use of biased, discriminatory hiring and lending technologies that perpetuate hiring and employment discrimination.
Systemic inequities and barriers keep people 鈥 particularly people of color 鈥 from accessing the mainstays of economic life; including education, employment, and homeownership; resulting in racial disparities in wealth and income. These disparities result from a combination of ongoing discrimination, structural inequality, and biases across our institutions, and emerge in new forms of technology, including through artificial intelligence, that influence nearly every facet of life.
Through litigation and advocacy, we aim to remedy deeply entrenched sources of inequality and ensure that access to opportunity and the ability to build wealth is available to all.
All people should have an equal opportunity to earn a living, find a home, and get an education.
Our economic justice work includes:
- Exposing Discriminatory Hiring and Lending Tech: Leveraging research and integrated advocacy, we will promote a more equitable approach to AI policy and expose and stop the use of biased, discriminatory hiring and lending technologies that perpetuate hiring and employment discrimination.

Education Equity
Our goal is to ensure all students have equal access to high quality education and safe schools.
All students have a right to an equal education, but students of color (particularly Black students), students with disabilities, and low-income youth have historically been marginalized, criminalized, and under-resourced by the public school system.
We will challenge unconstitutional disciplinary policies that disparately target Black students and infringe on their right to a safe learning environment. We will also support race conscious admission policies to increase access to underrepresented groups who face systemic barriers to higher education.
All students deserve equal access to a high quality education, a safe learning environment, and a diverse student body that enriches the educational experiences of all students.
Our education equity work includes:
- Defending Race Conscious Admissions: The 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of Massachusetts, and the 红杏视频 of North Carolina filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to uphold universities鈥 ability to consider race in college admissions.
All students have a right to an equal education, but students of color (particularly Black students), students with disabilities, and low-income youth have historically been marginalized, criminalized, and under-resourced by the public school system.
We will challenge unconstitutional disciplinary policies that disparately target Black students and infringe on their right to a safe learning environment. We will also support race conscious admission policies to increase access to underrepresented groups who face systemic barriers to higher education.
All students deserve equal access to a high quality education, a safe learning environment, and a diverse student body that enriches the educational experiences of all students.
Our education equity work includes:
- Defending Race Conscious Admissions: The 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of Massachusetts, and the 红杏视频 of North Carolina filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to uphold universities鈥 ability to consider race in college admissions.
How Can We Achieve Systemic Equality?
红杏视频 Deputy Legal Director Yasmin Cader explains what needs to be done in the fight against systemic racial discrimination in order to create a world in which everyone鈥檚 civil rights and liberties are recognized.

Learn More 红杏视频 the Issues on This Page
Related Content
-
Press ReleaseApr 2025
Capital Punishment
Court Declines to Rule on Constitutionality of Kansas Death Penalty and Death Qualification
KANSAS CITY, Kan. 鈥 After hearing a historic challenge to the constitutionality of the death penalty and the practice of death qualification, a Kansas trial court has issued a written order finding extensive and irredeemable defects in the application of the death penalty over the last 30 years. The court declined to rule on the ultimate questions regarding the constitutionality of the state鈥檚 death penalty and the practice of death qualification because the individuals who brought the challenge no longer faced the death penalty. In its opinion the court highlighted that: The death penalty is not a deterrent. 鈥淭he scientific community has found no reliable evidence of the death penalty being a deterrent to homicides.鈥 The death penalty is costly. 鈥淢ore than $4 million has been spent with the results being no death penalty sentences and zero executions.鈥 Racial bias infects capital prosecutions. 鈥淭he factors which distinguish death sentence cases from non-death sentence cases are the race and gender of the victim, and the race and gender of the defendant.鈥 Courts have been unable to ensure capital juries are free of racial bias. 鈥淸The legal framework for limiting discrimination in jury selection] is so flawed that it does not protect racial biases in jury selection and must be reformed, a fact known to Kansans for years.鈥 鈥淚n each of the four cases where we raised this challenge in Kansas, none of our clients ultimately faced capital trials where the death penalty remained on the table,鈥 said Cassandra Stubbs, director of the 红杏视频鈥檚 Capital Punishment Project. 鈥淭hat is no coincidence. The evidentiary hearings have consistently exposed uncomfortable truths to state prosecutors, the courts, and the public about the deep flaws and injustices embedded in the death penalty system. While we are relieved that none of our clients have received death sentences, the systemic issues that these cases have brought to light persist. We remain committed to challenging the death penalty on behalf of people facing capital charges in Kansas, with the hope that state legislators will end the death penalty and make future legal challenges unnecessary.鈥 The 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of Kansas, Democracy Forward, the Kansas Death Penalty Defense Unit, Hogan Lovells, and Ali & Lockwood represented two individuals, Hugo Villaneuva-Morales and Antoine Fielder, in their constitutional pre-trial challenges to the death penalty in Wyandotte County. Following extensive pre-trial litigation, including the weeklong evidentiary hearing challenging the death penalty, the cases were resolved without the death penalty. The state and Mr. Fielder entered into a plea agreement and Mr. Fielder was sentenced to life without parole. The prosecution tried Mr. Villanueva-Morales for capital murder but ultimately withdrew its request for the death penalty. Because the two men no longer faced the prospect of a capital sentence, the court declined to address the broader constitutional claims.Affiliate: Kansas -
News & CommentaryApr 2025
Capital Punishment
Death Row Case Exposes Failures to Protect Childhood Trauma Survivors
Mikal Mahdi鈥檚 life was marked by abuse. Today, as he awaits execution, the courts have the responsibility to acknowledge the systemic failures that shaped his path.By: Megan Byrne, Elisa Epstein -
Florida Supreme CourtDec 2024
Capital Punishment
Michael Jackson v. State of Florida
This case gets at the very heart of our right to a jury trial. Traditionally and historically, the right to a jury trial has promised that a person could not be punished unless every single person in a group of one鈥檚 peers agreed, by jury vote, that that was the just outcome. However, Florida feels differently. When it comes to the death penalty, Florida is one of only two states that has decided that the 鈥渞ight to a trial by jury鈥 does not guarantee that a person will be sentenced to death by a unanimous jury. Instead, in Florida, a person can be sentenced to die even if four people on their jury think they should live. The state requires just eight of twelve jury votes for a death sentence, which not only disproportionately affects people of color, but the very ideals at the heart of the rights of citizenship.Status: Ongoing -
Press ReleaseFeb 2025
Capital Punishment
红杏视频 Responds to Supreme Court Decision in Glossip v. Oklahoma
WASHINGTON 鈥 In a major win for due process, the U.S. Supreme Court today granted Richard Glossip, a man on Oklahoma鈥檚 death row, a new trial and a chance to be fully exonerated. Richard Glossip was convicted in 1998 and sentenced to death for allegedly asking Justin Sneed 鈥 the prosecution鈥檚 star witness 鈥 to murder another man. Sneed's testimony was the only direct evidence connecting Glossip to the murder, and Glossip maintained his innocence throughout. His conviction was overturned by the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals but, despite inconsistent testimony from Sneed at retrial, Glossip was convicted again. It was only then, after two trials and two appeals, that an independent investigation revealed that the prosecution had deliberately destroyed key evidence and additional potentially exculpatory and impeachment evidence was made available to the defense. Those files revealed that Sneed lied at trial about facts that cast his entire testimony into doubt. Despite these new revelations about prosecutorial misconduct, Glossip unsuccessfully sought post-conviction relief, until the Supreme Court last year stayed his execution and agreed to hear the case. 鈥淩ichard Glossip has been fighting for two decades to prove his innocence; today the Supreme Court assured that he will finally have his day in court,鈥 said Brian Stull, deputy director of the 红杏视频鈥檚 Capital Punishment Project. 鈥淭oday鈥檚 decision reveals the error-prone and arbitrary nature of the death penalty, and the devastating impact of false testimony and wrongfully withheld evidence. Even after it became clear that prosecutors had buried exculpatory evidence, the machinery of the death penalty continued to grind on for years. This case shows that we cannot trust the state convict and imprison only the innocent, let alone to ensure that innocent people are never strapped to the execution table. It is long past time to end the death penalty in our country.鈥 The 红杏视频 filed an amicus brief in the case, arguing that prosecutors violated Glossip鈥檚 due process rights by failing to disclose exculpatory evidence and using Sneed鈥檚 false testimony to convict Glossip. The brief further highlights Oklahoma鈥檚 sordid history of violating these rights. 鈥淭ime after time, Oklahoma prosecutors have violated these precedents, despite repeated notice that their actions were not in compliance with the U.S. Constitution,鈥 the brief reads. This glaring pattern of errors almost led to the execution of an innocent person. It teaches that the government cannot be trusted to reliably, fairly, and equitably determine who should live and who should die. Glossip v. Oklahoma is part of the 红杏视频's Joan and Irwin Jacobs Supreme Court Docket.Court Case: Glossip v. OklahomaAffiliate: Oklahoma