DISCRIMINATION

White farmer sues Minnesota, alleging racial discrimination over grant program

Noah Fish — Wed, 31 Jan 2024 21:07:35 GMT

BELTRAMI COUNTY, Minn. — A northern Minnesota farmer is suing the governor of Minnesota and the commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Agriculture for racial discrimination.

In a lawsuit filed in federal court, Lance Nistler, of Beltrami County — who is white — argues that his denied application for the Minnesota Down Payment Assistance Grant program was a violation of his civil rights.

According to the lawsuit, Nistler applied for the grant program, which awards qualified farmers with up to $15,000 in grant funding to help them purchase their first farm, in July of last year.

"When Nistler heard of the program, he saw his chance to make his dream a reality and applied for the latest round of grants," the lawsuit reads. "Despite Nistler being the model individual the state ought to be assisting with farm ownership, and despite being one of the first applications picked in the lottery, he lacked the state’s preferred skin color and sex. His application was pushed to the back of the line, solely because of his race and sex."

Instructions on the grant program application state that preference would be given to emerging farmers, which are classified as "farmers, or aspiring farmers, who are women, veterans, persons with disabilities, American Indian or Alaskan Natives, members of a community of color, young, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, or asexual (LGBTQIA+), or urban, and any other emerging farmers as determined by the commissioner.”

A spokesperson for the Minnesota Department of Agriculture said they can't comment on active legal cases, but the Down Payment Assistance Grant program is continuing as usual at this time.

Emerging Farmers background

According to the 2017 Census of Agriculture, fewer than 2% of Minnesota’s 111,000 farmers are people of color.

The Minnesota Department of Agriculture's Emerging Farmers Office was created by the Legislature in 2021, as a way to help diversify the agriculture industry in the state. Emerging farmers are defined as a group that has been historically excluded from traditional government assistance programs, and those without connections to existing commodity farms.

Participants in listening sessions with the Emerging Farmers Working Group cited access to capital, discrimination, land availability and land prices as barriers to starting their own operations.

Lance Nistler

Nistler said the farm he's looking to purchase one day is now owned by his father, where small grains are raised on 800-1,000 acres. He said he worked on the farm while growing up, when it was a dairy operation.

Nistler, who works as a field service technician for Westinghouse Electric Company, said he recently decreased his hours at that job to make more room in his life for farming.

"To become more available to the farm, so I'm here during all the planting and in the summer months," he said. "And then try to be here through all of the harvest as much as possible."

He said in the last couple years, he's gotten "a lot more involved" with the farming operation.

"It's something I really enjoy doing," Nistler said. "I'm trying to ultimately just be a full-time farmer."

He is the only sibling in his family who has interest in taking over the farm, he said.

"I'm really the only, out of all the other siblings, that have been related directly to the operations of the farm," he said.

But his parents aren't able to pass the farm on to him without charging a steep price.

"This is their retirement, so it's not going to be given away," he said.

When applying for the grant assistance program, Nistler said he considered himself to fall into the category of emerging farmer.

"I felt like I was, or should have been considered as one," he said. "My chances were limited just because of my color of my skin and the gender that I am."

Asked if he's ever felt that way before, Nistler said no.

"Life isn't fair, but like specifically because of the color of my skin? No," he said.

Andrew Quinio is an attorney listed on the lawsuit, who said the grant assistance program that Nistler applied for is "fundamentally discriminatory" because it disadvantages farmers based on race.

"If you're a white, male farmer like Lance, you do not get the eligibility preference for these down payment assistance grants," Quinio said.

Quinio said the program application should have included at least one question regarding if an applicant had ever felt mistreated or discriminated against because of their skin or gender in the past.

"If this is a program intended to address specific instances of discrimination, which is supposed to be the intent if you're going to use race, then the application should at the very least ask to name an instance where you have been discriminated against," he said.

"I think this lawsuit addresses this really improper use of race as a stereotype. The idea that because of your skin color, the state is going to make certain assumptions about you, and it's going to assume that you are disadvantaged or advantaged, such that it will provide you with a down payment assistance grant or withhold one from you."

Quinio said this isn't the first time the Pacific Legal Foundation has taken on a lawsuit like Nistler's. He said there were several lawsuits during the COVID-19 pandemic regarding loan forgiveness programs.

"Pacific Legal represented several farmers in reversing those through legal challenges," he said. "There have been a variety of COVID relief grants that were also race-based in different parts of the country."

"This is something that we've definitely taken on, and that we've had a history of taking on," Quinio said.

]]>

Truckers hire civil rights lawyers after alleged profiling at Denny’s in Sioux Falls

Hunter Dunteman — Tue, 12 Sep 2023 20:45:30 GMT

EDITOR'S NOTE: This story was updated on Sept. 13 to include a description and an audio file of a 911 call placed by Denny's management.

SIOUX FALLS — Two truck drivers have hired civil rights attorneys and are considering legal action after they say they were “racially profiled,” refused service and removed from a Sioux Falls restaurant.

Damon Whitfield and Hector Madera, who are Black, are two long-haul truckers who travel the country as part of their work. On Aug. 13, the two claim they were racially profiled and threatened at the Denny’s off 60th Street North in Sioux Falls.

In response, the duo have hired Georgia civil rights attorneys Harry Daniels and Erica Wilson to help them examine “all legal options before moving forward.”

While taking a break from the road that day, Whitfield and Madera stopped into the 24-hour restaurant for breakfast. That’s when they say a “white waitress ignored the two men while serving white customers.”

“Before long, the pair noticed that their waitress was intentionally ignoring them in order to serve white customers who had come in after they had,” reads a Sept. 12 statement from Whitfield’s and Madera’s attorneys. “When the pair calmly attempted to get the waitress’ attention and order, she began yelling and said, ‘I don't need you people calling me over to this table.' She then stormed off and threatened to call the police.”

In a video recorded by the men and uploaded to YouTube, a second waitress approached and told them she had “no idea” why they were asked to leave, as she was uninvolved in the original discussion, but reiterated that officers with the Sioux Falls Police Department were on their way to the restaurant.

On Wednesday, Sept. 13, Whitfield and Madera's attorneys released the audio of a 911 call placed by Denny's Regional Manager Michael Fletcher.

Hunter Dunteman · SFPD 23 - 176811 Madera, Hector & Whitfield, Damon (phone Call)redacted

In the call, Fletcher told a 911 dispatcher that he was not at the restaurant, but was calling on behalf of his team members, who reported that he was told Whitfield and Madera were being "unruly” and “very confrontational,” adding that the men were “harassing the team" and "following them around the restaurant.”

While the second waitress is still conversing with the men, two police officers arrive and ask Whitfield and Madera to step outside the restaurant to talk, the video shows.

“We just came to get something to eat, and they’re telling us we can’t be served,” one of the men told the officers. “I’ve seen stuff like this on YouTube, but I never thought that it would happen to me.”

The two men tell police they were the only Black customers in the restaurant, and that they believed that played a factor in them being denied service.

“It’s hard not to think that, you know,” one said.

After a short discussion, one of the police officers apologized to Whitfield and Madera for their experience.

“I’m sorry that happened to you guys,” the officer said before providing the men with a phone number to contact to report their experience to Denny’s management.

In a statement provided to Dakota News Now, Denny’s President and CEO Roland Spongberg said an investigation into the employee’s behavior was conducted, and that she is no longer employed by the company.

“Denny’s is committed to a culture of inclusion and service excellence for all guests. We conducted a thorough third-party investigation into the incident at the Denny’s location in Sioux Falls, South Dakota,” Spongberg said. “As a result of the investigation, the franchise owner immediately took decisive action, and the employee is no longer with the company.”

Spongberg continued by admitting the situation fell short of the company’s standards, and that employees at the 60th Street North location would undergo additional training following the incident.

“Denny’s maintains a strict zero-tolerance policy when it comes to any form of discrimination. We acknowledge there were opportunities to improve the service level in this specific situation. We maintain our commitment to ongoing training and development of all staff,” he said. “The employees at the location will immediately go through a dedicated training program to ensure the team delivers above and beyond our guests’ expectations. We regret this incident and want to apologize to the guests involved. Clearly, we fell short of our own standards that day and are committed to making it right.”

In the joint statement from Whitfield and Madera’s attorneys, Wilson said she can relate to the difficult job of a truck driver, and that she’s disheartened by Whitfield’s and Madera’s experience.

“I am the daughter and granddaughter of truck drivers and I know firsthand the sacrifices these men make daily to be able to provide for their families,” Wilson said. “I am disheartened by the fact they were reduced to common criminals for merely wanting to grab breakfast so they could get back to work.”

Whitfield and Madera say they are currently examining all their legal options before moving forward.

]]>

Critics called it a 'thoughtcrime' database. But what will a Minnesota civil rights report actually track?

Alex Derosier — Wed, 28 Jun 2023 09:44:00 GMT

ST. PAUL — As part of a broader public safety bill passed by the Minnesota Legislature this year, the state will soon start collecting reports of discrimination from community groups in what backers say is an effort to keep better track of civil rights trends.

Democratic-Farmer-Labor backers say closer tracking of bias incidents that do not always rise to the level of a crime is key to tackling discrimination in the state, especially amid a recent rise in reports of vandalism and violence against Asian Americans and Muslims in Minnesota. They also say people from marginalized groups, such as ethnic minorities or the LGBT community, are likelier to share incidents with community groups rather than the police.

In a recent interview, Sen. Zaynab Mohamed, a Minneapolis DFLer who carried the bill in the Senate, pointed to two fires at Minneapolis mosques and a COVID-era surge in reports of discrimination against Asian Americans as reasons for the tracking.

“If we don't see what's happening, we will not be able to do anything about it,” Mohamed said. "These communities will continue to be attacked. And there will be no one stepping up to do something about it because we just haven't named the issue."

The new law directs the Minnesota Department of Human Rights to track information from community organizations representing historically marginalized groups, analyze civil rights trends, and compile findings into a report to share with lawmakers in 2025. Officials will compile past and future incidents like “fires at mosques, swastikas painted on property, and Nazi salutes occurring at school events,” according to department spokesman Taylor Putz.

The department will have to produce a report on bias trends over the next two years and deliver it to state lawmakers by Feb. 1, 2025. The public safety bill appropriates $645,000 for the “Report on Civil Rights Trends."

But many may have heard the bill presented in a very different light as it moved through the Legislature this spring, when GOP critics questioned the reliability of reporting and implications for free speech. An earlier version of the bill specifically allowed people to directly call the Department of Human Rights to report incidents, language that did not make it into the bill's final version.

During House debate, Republican opponents characterized the proposal as calling for the creation of a “bias incidents database” which would track reports of discrimination that would not rise to the level of a criminal offense. They painted the bill as an “Orwellian” push to track objectionable speech, and questioned whether the information collected by state officials would be properly vetted. Rep. Walter Hudson, R-Albertville, called it a "thoughtcrime" database.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5bknGV4h4s&t=5603s

Publications such as the Daily Mail, New York Post and conservative magazine National Review published reports on the debate and bill using this characterization.

The key moment that caught the most attention? An exchange during a floor debate when Rep. Harry Niska, R-Ramsey, asked House bill sponsor Rep. Samantha Vang, DFL-Brooklyn Center, if publishing an article on the theory that COVID-19 was a bioweapon that had originated in a Chinese laboratory could count as a bias incident under the new legislation.

Vang said it would be possible.

“With the rhetoric we have seen since the pandemic regarding accusing Asians of bringing in the coronavirus, that is bias-motivated,” the first-term representative said. “So that can be considered a bias incident.”

Niska also asked if wearing a shirt supporting Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling would count as a bias incident, as Rowling has expressed critical views of transgender people. Vang said it would depend on the situation's context and would be a better question for an attorney.

Asked by Forum News Service whether spreading a lab theory on COVID would count as a bias incident, Sen. Mohamed said she trusted the judgment of Human Rights Department officials.

“Could that happen? Sure, maybe,” she said, but added: “They know exactly what they're doing. They understand the goal of what this legislation is supposed to do.”

Asked the same question, Putz with the Department of Human Rights said the House debate centered around “old language” that is not in the final version of the bill that became law.

The bill's final version is narrower than the original proposal, and it's still unclear what specific information the report from the human rights department will contain.

In the original proposal, the bill called for the department to "solicit, receive, and compile information from community organizations, school districts and charter schools, and individuals regarding incidents committed in whole or in substantial part because of the victim's or another's actual or perceived race, color, ethnicity, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, age, (or) national origin."

In its final form as a law, language calls for the department to “analyze civil rights trends ... including information compiled from community organizations that work directly with historically marginalized communities."

So the report will track incidents and monitor trends, but officials haven’t decided exactly how they’ll do that, Putz said.

“It's still too early to know exactly all of the information that we'll be collecting,” he explained. “Whatever information is collected, it will provide a robust understanding of what is happening in Minnesota communities.”

What officials do know right now is community organizations such as Jewish Community Action, the Coalition of Asian American Leaders, and the Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas, will provide reports of bias incidents to the state.

Another concern critics raised about the bias report is that it could be subject to abuse by groups who stand to benefit from inflating the frequency of bias incidents. The legislation does not call for any specific vetting procedures for reporting, some Republicans said, meaning false data could end up in a report on trends.

Asked about this concern, Putz said it would have been more of a problem if the human rights department were to take direct reports of discrimination from individuals. With nonprofits and other groups with a track record of documenting discrimination being the source of information, that won’t be a concern, he said.

Still, even with the changes, GOP critics are not convinced. Niska in a May statement on the public safety bill said changes to the bias incidents tracking language still achieve the same goal.

“They are pretending to fix the speech registry but are still funding it while using more vague language that refers to analyzing civil rights trends,” Niska said. “They are embarrassed because they can’t publicly defend their plan to create a new state-funded branch of thought police, so they have resorted to using misleading euphemisms while gaslighting the public.”

Follow Alex Derosier on Twitter @xanderosier or email aderosier@forumcomm.com.

]]>

DOJ files suit against South Dakota hoteliers that announced Native American ban

Hunter Dunteman — Wed, 19 Oct 2022 19:59:22 GMT

RAPID CITY, S.D. — The U.S. Department of Justice on Wednesday filed a federal discrimination lawsuit against two Rapid City, South Dakota, hoteliers alleging steps taken to ban Native Americans from the property violated the Civil Rights Act.

The lawsuit, filed against Grand Gateway Hotel and Cheers Sports Lounge in northern Rapid City, alleges that owner Connie Uhre and her son, Nicholas, denied access to Native American patrons in violation of Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion or national origin in places of public accommodation, such as hotels and other places of entertainment.

Federal authorities cite the lawsuit stems from an email chain in which Connie allegedly told various hotel owners and managers in Rapid City that she doesn’t want to allow Native Americans on property belonging to her.

“I really do not want to allow Natives on property. Every time we have problems I call the police with it, the first thing they ask is what nationality is he or she and 98% of the time I have to say native, and we call at least once a week,” an email from Connie reads. “They kill each other walk around with guns... The problem is we do not know the nice ones from the bad natives...so we just have to say no to them!!”

Following the email, to which Nicholas “did not disavow or otherwise disagree with, Connie allegedly posted to Facebook that Native Americans would no longer be welcome to the hotel or sports bar.

“Do to the killing that took place at the Grand Gateway Hotel on March 19 2022 at 4 am plus all the vandalism we have had since the Mayor and Police Department are working with the non profit organization ( Dark Money),” her comment read. “We will no long allow any Native American on property. Or in Cheers Sports Bar. Natives killing Natives. Rancher and Travelers will receive a very special rate of 59.00 a night. Book Direct.”

Court documents allege that on the following day, on March 21, two Native Americans entered the hotel and inquired about rates. As the booking process was underway, the employee allegedly refused to rent the rooms, citing a policy — which was not in writing at the time — that rooms could not be rented to “locals,” a policy which the employee said came from “Nick.”

On March 22, five Native Americans, each representatives of a Rapid City-based non-profit, attempted to rent five rooms. They were allegedly told the hotel was not renting rooms. After showing an employee an Expedia website that indicated rooms were available, the employee allegedly acknowledged vacancies, but told the group that the hotel was “not really renting out rooms right now.” The employee told the group the policy came from management.

In the lawsuit, the Department of Justice argues that the conduct of the businesses “constitutes a pattern or practice of resistance to the full enjoyment of rights” by Native Americans and that said practices are in violation of federal law.

The Department of Justice requested a federal court find the businesses’ actions in violation of the Civil Rights Act and enjoin the defendants from engaging in further discriminatory practices.

“Restricting access to a hotel based on a person’s race is prohibited by federal law,” said U.S. Attorney Alison J. Ramsdell for the District of South Dakota. “At the U.S. Attorney’s Office, we are called to ensure that individuals are treated equally at public accommodations in South Dakota. We are committed to protecting that fundamental right for Native Americans.”

Kristen Clarke, assistant attorney general of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division agreed.

“Policies prohibiting Native Americans from accessing public establishments are both racially discriminatory and unlawful,” said Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “The Justice Department will continue to vigorously protect the rights of all people to go about their daily lives free from discrimination at hotels, restaurants and other public accommodations around the country.”

No hearing dates have been scheduled for the case as of Wednesday afternoon.

This is a developing story. Check back with Forum News Service for updates.]]>

Andersen Corp. to payout $41K, revise hiring practices after withdrawing job offer from disabled applicant

Hunter Dunteman — Wed, 12 Oct 2022 19:20:55 GMT

ST. PAUL — A Minnesota-based manufacturing company on Wednesday, Oct. 12, agreed to payout over $40,000 and revise their hiring practices as part of a settlement regarding a discriminatory job offer withdrawal.

The settlement resolved a complaint lodged with the Minnesota Department of Human Rights (MDHR), which works to create a more equitable and inclusive state via the elimination of discrimination.

An investigation by the MDHR found that in 2019, the Bayport-headquartered Andersen Corp. — an international door and window producer — withdrew a job offer from an applicant at their Bayport production facility after the company learned of the applicant’s disability.

The company had claimed the basis for the withdrawal of the offer was on the grounds that the applicant was unable to safely operate a forklift. The MDHR found, however, that forklift operation was not an essential function of the job that had been offered to the applicant.

Countering Andersen’s alleged basis, the MDHR concluded the applicant was able to safely operate a forklift and had doctor’s approval to do so. After providing medical documentation to support his ability to operate a forklift, the applicant reportedly asked the company to reconsider the withdrawal of the offer, to which the MDHR said Andersen “again refused.”

After an MDHR investigation concluded that Andersen’s justification for rescinding the job offer was false and was instead based on the applicant’s disability status, the MDHR found Andersen in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act, the state’s civil rights law which offers additional, more comprehensive protections to individuals than federal law requires.

The MDHR did not release any specific information about the applicant, including their gender, age, disability or position applied for.

As part of the settlement, Andersen agreed to payout $41,000 to the applicant, the equivalent of one year’s salary had the applicant been hired. The company also agreed to audit all manufacturing positions at each Minnesota-based production facility to ensure job descriptions accurately reflect the actual job functions of each role.

Andersen further agreed to create and enforce an appeals process for applicants to dispute a decision to rescind a job offer and to provide all current and future employees with anti-discrimination training, including topics involving disabilities. MDHR will monitor the company for compliance to the agreement for a period of three years.

According to a spokesman for the MDHR, from Jan.1 through June 30, the department received 251 civil rights complaints from Minnesotans this year, over half of which fall under their employment category. Of those complaints, the most common are individuals reporting disability-based discrimination, followed by sex- and race-based discrimination.

]]>