Racial segregation is back, thanks to the left. Racial discrimination is being enshrined under law, thanks to the left. Another way to destroy the country is to sow division and destruction through a attacks based on race and segregation based on race and other characteristics. And in San Francisco, they are literally handing out money based on race, sex, and transgendered identity in complete violation of the law. It’s so brazen, it’s to be shocking.

I mean, why, in this day and age, do we have to argue that you can’t give money out on the basis of race if you’re the government? But that’s what they’re doing in San Francisco because they’re just this extremist group that are running the city that are doing this. And so we represent taxpayers who are aggrieved by this because taxpayers in California have the right to sue localities when they spend money on illegal purposes like this or illegal programs like this.

So we sued over San Francisco’s discriminatory payments to, quote black Latinx men, which the law refers to or the program refers to as transgender women. Now, I’m not saying this to be are kind of the craziness around this is that you kind of always have to double check yourself to know what you’re talking about, because your first instinct when you hear transgender women is that they’re women who are doing something related to transgenderism.

No, what they’re trying to do is disguise the fact that these people are actually biological males who are trying to present themselves through mutilation and other changes as women. So this is the way the program works. You can’t get money if you’re white. You might get money if you’re black, but not if you’re a black female who presents themselves as a male, a transgendered man. Right, but only if you’re a black male presenting yourself as a black female.

Does that sound lawful to you? Sounds racist to me. Sexist, right? Sex discrimination and race discrimination. Pretty simple. So we filed the lawsuit, sued the mayor, the city treasurer, then the director of the city’s Office of Transgender Initiatives, and city administrator Carmen Chu for violating an equal protection clause of the California Constitution, which is similar to the federal version. Mayor Breed announced the launch of the Guaranteed Income for Trans People program on November 22, 2022.

Its acronym is Gift. The mayor’s office started stated in a press release that the city will, quote, provide low income transgender San Franciscans with one $200 each month, up to 18 months to help address financial insecurity within trans communities. According to a lawsuit, applicants who do not identify as transgender, nonbinary, gender, nonconforming, or intersex are not eligible to participate in the gift program. Applicants are prioritized based on their biological sex and race and ethnicity.

Biological males identifying as females are given preference over biological females identifying as male, and applicants identifying as black or Latino are given preference over applicants identifying as other races ethnicities. I think the government doesn’t refer to it as Latino. They smear and denigrate Latinos by calling them Latinx, which is some crazy transgenderism as well. The program began dispersing funds in January of 2023, and the program is expected to continue through June.

We’ll probably renew it if they can, unless we stop them through this lawsuit. And I think we spent about a million dollars this far on it, and I think our numbers show 55 have participated. So we already know there have been acts of discrimination and illicit pain bins based on discriminatory practices. But hopefully the case goes forward, we get more discovery to find out just how bad it is.

And the goal is to stop it. Right. It’s a taxpayer lawsuit, so the goal is to stop the program that’s outside the law, so taxpayer money is no more wasted and diverted to illegal purposes. This is, I guess, unusual for a judicial watch lawsuit, but we allege transgender status discrimination. But it’s true. It’s what they’re doing. It’s kind of a version of sex discrimination. Right. Plaintiffs contend that any expenditure of taxpayer funds or taxpayer finance resources on the gift program is illegal because of the requirement eligible participants be transgender.

We also allege sex discrimination and race ethnicity discrimination. So we won a judgment declaring any and all expenditures of the taxpayer funds and finance resources to be illegal and an injunction permanently prohibiting defendants from expending or causing the expenditure of taxpayer funds on that gift program. In. I mean, we already had a foIA that came out. We had investigated it under FOIA, and we found that the program also allows legal aliens to apply.

So that’s another problem. Although if the legislature. I don’t know if it’s a problem under California law, because, believe it or not, your state legislature can authorize benefits in many circumstances for illegal aliens. So you got to always watch that. But the use of the funds by participants is virtually unrestricted. That’s what our foia found. So that it’s cash, hence it’s gift is the acronym. Right. But it truly is a gift.

They get the cash, and it’s on debit cards, and there’s no check on how the money spent. So it’s just a waste generally, but that’s not the issue because it’s discriminatory, no matter what the checks would be. Allows people who engage in survival sex trades to apply prostitutes. Right. I guess there’s no good reason to keep prostitutes out of the program. Right. But the problem is the discrimination on the basis of race and sex.

Now, we’ve had success in California before, believe it or not, challenging programs that are discriminatory. You may recall a year, I guess it’s about two years now, the middle of 2022, we had successfully sued California over their mandate that corporate boards of directors have race, sex ethnicity quotas and LGBTQ quotas as well. So there were two separate cases, one on the sex quota, and then after that, they passed their quota requirement based on these other identity characteristics, race and ethnicity and lgbt status.

And in both cases, the courts found the requirements to be unlawful under California law because they require discrimination. The left, or those supporting these discriminatory contexts, they often say, well, they say the beneficiary is someone we’re sympathetic to, so you really can’t object to it. But for every person who is allowed to benefit from this program, there’s someone who is disallowed on the basis of race and sex or transgender status.

And that’s illegal in California, and it’s illegal generally under our constitution. The government can’t do that. So we’ve won in California and stopped race quotas. The crazed left efforts to destroy America through race division. So we already got a good track record there. Transgender extremists running San Francisco are illegally using taxpayer money to hand out free cash to transgender individuals based on race and sex and blatant violation of the state’s constitution.

We also have a case in Minnesota where the Minnesota, excuse me, Minneapolis Teachers union or school district or the city had a union contract with the teachers that in the event of layoffs, under the contract, it would be race based. Minorities would be protected from being laid off initially, and if there were hires after the layoffs were no longer needed and they could hire people back, they’d be given priority.

Again, blatant race discrimination. So that case is on appeal because I think the judge found, I think, believe it or not, he thought that maybe the race discrimination would actually help taxpayers. So we’ll see what the Supreme Court thinks of that in Minnesota. Judicial Watch is one of America’s leading civil rights groups because we’re out there defending the rule of law to prevent people from being discriminated against.

Now, the left used to be, at least pretend to be against that. And if you want a colorblind society, as the constitution requires, if you want just antidiscrimination laws to be upheld at the federal or state level, you can’t have an exception for political reasons. Or in the case of the left, they want these exceptions to again divide people by race in order to destroy America. I guess the ideology is interesting, but the fact is legally they can’t do it and should not be able to do it.

And we’ve been able to stop a lot of it, but they’re not going to stop pushing for the destruction of this mean. You see this with the Biden administration, with their focus on equity, which is kind of a kissing cousin of this effort to discriminate and segregate on the basis of race. We talked about last week how they had a play date in Oakland at an Oakland school that was designed to exclude white children, school children and families.

I mean, racial segregation is back. Thanks to the left, racial discrimination is being enshrined under law. Thanks to the left, naked racial discrimination. They’re not even calling it affirmative action or where you got to kind of turn over some rocks to see what’s really going on. This is we’re going to give you money based on your race or we’re going to have a quota based on race or sex or whatever.

So we’re going to stand against it in court. That’s what we’re doing out in California with another historic taxpayer lawsuit to vindicate the rule of law, defend our constitution and constitutional government in the state of California. We’re not going to abandon California to the predations of the left. We’re protecting taxpayers in California. .

See more of Judicial Watch on their Public Channel and the MPN Judicial Watch channel.