Ideologues and radicals are unfazed by setbacks and reality checks. No matter how many times illiberal proposals for racial discrimination have failed by popular vote, gubernatorial veto or political calculations, they constantly come up with new wineskins to promote the scheme of treating people differently on the basis of race or color.  **Rhetorical subtefuges, pleasant-sounding euphemisms and confusing proxies are all weapons in the radicals’ arsenal**.

In the California Legislature,  “reparations” is the new codename for unconstitutional racial preferences.**Under the mantel of reparations, the California Legislative Black Caucus  [unveiled](https://blackcaucus.legislature.ca.gov/news/california-legislative-black-caucus-announces-2025-legislative-priorities)  its “Road to Repair 2025 Priority Bill Package” in February, presenting a slew of legislation aimed at “**addressing the systemic barriers that Black Californians continue to face**,” rather than remedying historical wrongs as a result of slavery. The politicians also want these bills to help “**build a more just and equitable future**.” Altogether, the bill authors are not shy about their intent to use descendancy from slavery as a race proxy. If passed, each of these bills will inevitably lead to violations of Proposition 209 and perpetuate the ideology of dividing Californians (and Americans) by race.

**This is, in essence, DEI 2.0.**

Sadly, against prevailing public opinions for equal treatment and against sound political judgement,  **the state legislature is actively moving DEI 2.0 through the committee process**. A number of committee hearings have been scheduled on  **Tuesday (April 22) and Wednesday (April 23)**. As one of the first organizations to  [expose](https://californiaglobe.com/articles/twitter-hate-trolls-attack-calif-for-equal-rights-foundation-exec-dir-over-reparations/)  the race-based nature of reparations in California and the state’s recognized opposition to many reparations-themed proposals, CFER plans to  **speak at the hearings and organize the public to show up in support on April 22/23**  in the state capitol.

On  **Tuesday, April 22**,

· 8 am: the Assembly Judiciary Committee will hear testimonies and vote on  [AB 57](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB57), home purchase assistance for descendants of slaves.

· 8:30 am: the Assembly Public Safety Committee will discuss and vote on  [AB 1071](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1071&search_keywords=race), criminal procedure reform to combat “systemic racism and white supremacy.”

· 9:30 am: the Senate Judiciary Committee will decide on  [SB 437](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB437&search_keywords=slavery),  allocation of $6 million to the California State University to conduct further research on reparations “for African Americans.”

· 1:30 pm: the Assembly Higher Education Committee will hear  [AB 7](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB7&search_keywords=slavery), college admissions preferences for slave descendants.

On  **Wednesday, April 23**,

· 9 am: the Senate Education Committee will hear  [SB 510](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB510), racial history education on “segregation, slavery, and systemic discrimination.”

· 9:30 am: the Senate Labor, Public Employment and Retirement will discuss and vote on  [SB 464](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB464), employer pay data reporting based on “race, ethnicity, sex and sexual orientation.”

· 9:30 am: the Senate Local Government Committee will decide  [SB 21](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB21&search_keywords=equity), equity workforce development based on race and gender.

If you live near Sacramento, I encourage you to  **join CFER on either (or both) of the date**s to rally against the state’s wrongheaded push for discrimination. On each day (April 22 and April 23), we will meet in the morning in front of the State Office Building at  **1021 O St, Sacramento, CA 95814.**  Reply to  [info@cferfoundation.org](mailto:info@cferfoundation.org)  and let us know if you can participate so that we can coordinate further.

· We will start at  **8 am on Tuesday, April 22**.

· We will start at  **8:45 am on Wednesday, April 22**.

With your participation, we can demonstrate to state lawmakers that  **the grassroots coalition organized to defeat Proposition 16 is still active today to monitor, defend and promote equal rights**. We will have some pamphlets and T-shirts ready for you.  **Please consider being a part of this important effort**!

We also understand that you may not be able to make it to Sacramento. But you can still show support for CFER’s work with a generous  [donation](https://www.cferfoundation.org/support)  – it will be much appreciated!

Thank you in advance!

large_cover0822.jpg

medium_cover0822.jpg

small_cover0822.jpg

thumbnail_cover0822.jpg

cover0822.jpg

California Legislature Enacts DEI 2.0 with Reparations Bills: Join CFER on April 22 & 23 to Rally against

Here we go again. Even with Proposition 209 and the Supreme Court ruling in  _SFFA v. Harvard/UNC_, California schools are still disregarding the law and engaging in racial discrimination.

While undergraduate admissions continue to be an area of contention and legal scrutiny, many have identified a new concern – various  **scholarships, grants, and financial aid programs that exclude certain races/ethnicities**. Currently, there are two programs we are examining and  **would love to learn more directly from students who may be negatively impacted** by these programs.

**1.** **The University of California at San Diego: “Black Alumni Scholarship Fund”**

This  [program](https://crowdsurf.ucsd.edu/campaigns/uc-san-diego-black-alumni-scholarship-fund)  at UCSD, established by the UC San Diego Black Alumni Council and currently implemented by the San Diego Foundation (ostensibly due to Prop. 209), offers $2,500 awards to UCSD students who are black, renewed annually for up to four years. In addition, the program also “connects scholars with a network of resources such as the Black Resource Center’s Student Success Institute and learning communities.”

**2.** **Peralta Community College District: PAAAA Scholarship**

Peralta Community College District, encompassing Laney College, Merritt College, College of Alameda and Berkeley City College, offers this  [program](https://www.peralta.edu/admissions/student-resources/paaaa/scholarship)  to “recognize African American students.” It gives “two $1,000 scholarships,” “one district-wide NAACP $1,000 scholarship,” and “two districtwide African International $1,000 scholarships.” PAAAA is “an affiliate of the Western Region Council on Black American Affairs (WRCBAA) and the National Council on Black American Affairs (NCBAA).”

We are in search of  **current undergraduate students at UCSD or from the Peralta Community College District who are not Black/African American**. They may be **discriminated against and excluded**  from either one of these two programs on the basis of race. If you know anyone who fits our search criteria, would you let us know by responding to this email? You can  **help CFER more effectively challenge unconstitutional discrimination by identifying potential students from these schools, whose identity will be protected**.

Thank you in advance!

large_8854c1617cf374e5b25de91eb314c0d0.png

medium_8854c1617cf374e5b25de91eb314c0d0.png

small_8854c1617cf374e5b25de91eb314c0d0.png

thumbnail_8854c1617cf374e5b25de91eb314c0d0.png

8854c1617cf374e5b25de91eb314c0d0.png

Action Alert Regarding Race-based Scholarships at UCSD and Peralta Community College District

Do you know that  **[167](https://strapi-cfer.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/8e3def30e39bfa1b03cdd2ff045c9a13.pdf) colleges and universities in California are certified “Minority Serving Institutions (MSI),”** a federal  [program](https://www.doi.gov/pmb/eeo/doi-minority-serving-institutions-program)  that rewards schools that enroll certain percentages of minority students with “in-kind services, volunteerism, diverse hiring, grants and contacts” ? [Note: only Asian American and Pacific Islander Serving Institutions (AANAPISI) and Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSI),  _not_  Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), are counted here.] 167, or  **nearly a quarter of all higher education institutions**  in the Golden State, is a shocking number!

In other words, these schools enjoy a federally bestowed advantage over the rest for having achieved demographically significant student bodies, even though the qualifying number of minority students may have vastly different individual backgrounds. Some may come from wealthy, new immigrant families while others come from poverty perpetuated generationally. Therefore, are the sort of MSI programs based on crude race and ethnicity consideration fair?

![Screenshot 2025-03-12 at 7.18.58 PM.png](https://strapi-cfer.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/4fd235d401e90716e86ca7518ceac32c.png)

Leaders of CFER ally American Civil Rights (ACR) Project – Professor Gail Heriot, Mr. Peter Kirsanow and Mr. Daniel Morenoff – are now challenging the constitutionality of MSI programs in  [their](https://strapi-cfer.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/a34254570d04d9810cb8ef9553e4fb2a.pdf)  [letters](https://strapi-cfer.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/21654070b31948dded10ca81e08dbb2b.pdf)  to Congress. Addressing the U.S. House Budget Committee, House Committee on Education & Workforce and their Senate counterparts, the ACR Project criticizes these programs as “racially and ethnically discriminatory programs [that] shovel about a billion dollars annually,” of which Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs) are “the largest and best funded.” The ACR Project has asked Congress to  **repeal these unconstitutional programs and “replace [them] with increased funding for a program that subsidizes colleges and universities that serve low-income students, or with programming to support the needs of actual English-language learners.”**

Of the 167 MSIs in California, many are public universities governed under Prop. 209, which bans racial preferences in public education. Notably, of the 23 California State University campuses, 21 are  [touted](https://www.calstate.edu/impact-of-the-csu/diversity/Documents/HSI-fact-sheet.pdf)  as HSIs. The University of California system  [celebrates](https://diversity.universityofcalifornia.edu/actions/minority-serving-institutions.html#:~:text=Five%20of%20UC's%20nine%20undergraduate,status%20at%20every%20UC%20campus.)  five of its nine undergraduate campuses as HSI-designated. These taxpayer-funded institutions use the federal MSI designation to claim exemptions from Prop. 209. They should not be allowed to do so.

**This timely proposal to defund MSI and fund programs based on economic/linguistic needs is a sensible one**. Not only does the race/ethnicity-based requirement (i.e. having a student body that is at least 25% Hispanic) fail to satisfy the longstanding constitutional doctrine of strict scrutiny, MSI programs are also not narrowly tailored to address any past discrimination. Nor are these programs a justifiable “supplement to help schools whose students are struggling with English as a second language.” To make matters worse, the lure of more federal funding, contracts and other favors has created  **a counterproductive, anti-excellence incentives for many schools**, such as the UC San Diego and the University of San Diego,  **to become obsessed with racial balancing at the expense of academic standards.**

We hope you support the “Defund MSI” proposal. It is  **a necessary initiative for devising public policies to incentivize both equal treatment and merit-based government assistance** (for higher education). It is about time that we as a country seriously confront the poison of race/ethno-centric policies/thinking. If you agree with the ACR Project’s legislative proposal, you can  [contact](https://www.congress.gov/members/find-your-member)  your congressional representatives and alert them to this initiative. As for CFER, we will further support this project with media outreach and awareness building. You can also support our work with a kind donation today!

As always, thank you!

large_Screenshot 2025-03-12 at 7.18.45 PM.png

medium_Screenshot 2025-03-12 at 7.18.45 PM.png

small_Screenshot 2025-03-12 at 7.18.45 PM.png

thumbnail_Screenshot 2025-03-12 at 7.18.45 PM.png

Screenshot 2025-03-12 at 7.18.45 PM.png

Defund Minority Serving Institutions: and replace them with more funding for students in need

CFER’s late January  [analysis](https://www.cferfoundation.org/posts/post-12-bills-2025)  of 12 new state bills was a preview of the California Legislature’s devotion to identity-politics-infused public policies. Since then, progressive state legislators have ramped up their efforts by introducing over a dozen of new bills intended for more reparations, more discrimination and more indoctrination. Just take a look!

**Reparations as “new ladders of opportunity for Black Californians”**

In response to the federal government’s crackdown on racial preferences, the California Legislative Black Caucus  [announced](https://blackcaucus.legislature.ca.gov/news/california-legislative-black-caucus-announces-2025-legislative-priorities)  its “Road to Repair 2025 Priority Bill Package” on February 20. Rather than providing government assistance to individuals and families on the basis of need, the package advances “policies that promote equity, economic opportunity, and justice for Black Californians.” Among these reparations-themed policies, there are:

● [ACA 7](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260ACA7): to amend Prop. 209 to include only "public employment, higher education enrollment, and public contracting” in the state’s ban on race-based affirmative action.

● [AB 742](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB742): to mandate the Department of Consumer Affairs to prioritize license applicants who are descendants of slaves.

● [SB 510](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB510): to incorporate "racial history education that covers the impact of segregation, slavery, and systemic discrimination."

● [ACA 6](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260ACA6): to amend the State Constitution to “prohibit slavery and involuntary servitude.”

● [SB 518](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB518&search_keywords=slavery): to establish the Bureau for Descendants of American Slavery to be comprised of a Genealogy Division, a Property Reclamation Division, an Education and Outreach Division, and a Legal Affairs Division.

● [SB 437](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB437&search_keywords=slavery): to allocate $6,000,000 for the purpose of enabling the California State University to conduct research in furtherance of the recommendations of the Task Force.

**Icing on the cake: more DEI and racial preferences**

Democratic state lawmakers are not just promoting reparations. They are also interested in perpetuating the unhealthy obsession with race in areas such as state governance, criminal procedures and data collection.

● [SB 515](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB515&search_keywords=slavery): to require public agencies to “include the additional collection categories and tabulations for specified Black or African American groups” when collecting demographic data.

● [AB 766](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB766&search_keywords=equity): to mandate all state agencies and departments to develop and update DEI strategic plans and racial equity analyses.

● [AB 1071](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1071&search_keywords=race): to make legislative declarations about the permeating role of “White Supremacy” and “systemic racism” in criminal convictions.

**Indoctrination in schools**

As if California’s failing public education doesn’t need reforms to bring back excellence, rigor and high standards, union-backed legislators propose the following bills to further the disastrous ideological programming:

● [AB 860](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB860&search_keywords=equity): to require county superintendents to help school districts better address equity concerns in local control and accountability plans.

● [AB 727](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB727&search_keywords=race): to provide state support (including a hotline for the Trevor Project) to students subjected to "school-based discrimination” against LGBTQ+ identities and expressions.

● [AB 1468](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1468): to mandate the State Board of Education to "develop and adopt academically rigorous content standards for ethnic studies instruction in high school.”

I know the constant drumbeat of racial discrimination and indoctrination in state lawmaking must be infuriating. But please don’t be discouraged. Nothing worth having comes easy.  **CFER will closely monitor all these bills, especially those in violation of Prop. 209 (notably the new ACA 7)**. All these proposals have yet to be assigned to a committee. Some may become active. At any rate, we will keep you posted.

We have also submitted position letters against AB 4, AB 7, AB 57, AB 62, AB 73, SB 21 and letters in support of SB 64 and SCA 1. You can read a summary of these bills  [here](https://www.cferfoundation.org/posts/post-12-bills-2025). These bills are in active committee process and CFER has registered our official positions. We hope that our work will make an impact on persuading the Legislature to look closely into these proposals and dial down on discrimination/indoctrination.

If you are interested in some of these policy developments, I encourage you to  [**contact**](https://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/) **your State Senators and Assemblymembers to make your voice heard**. As always,  **CFER defends equality and merit through proactively monitoring legislation**. You can support us with a  [contribution](https://www.cferfoundation.org/support)  so that we can keep following state policies while keeping you informed.

Thank you!

medium_Blue Minimal Action Word Definition Quote Facebook Post.png

small_Blue Minimal Action Word Definition Quote Facebook Post.png

thumbnail_Blue Minimal Action Word Definition Quote Facebook Post.png

Blue Minimal Action Word Definition Quote Facebook Post.png

Legislative Alert! Sacramento Doubles Down on Reparations, Discrimination and Indoctrination.

Represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), CFER [just filed](https://cferfoundation.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=b78c84756813bc7a3a38500a0&id=4145618fb8&e=0111f1f5cd) a lawsuit against the Fresno Unified School District (FUSD) to halt the school district’s unconstitutional $12-million-dollar **Office of African American Academic Acceleration** (A4 Office). A4 Office currently runs 13 programs that **exclusively** benefit FUSD’s African-American middle and high school students. Several CFER members are FUSD parents whose children are excluded from participating in these academic programs **solely on the basis of race**!  
  
Thanks to PLF and individual CFER members in FUSD, this timely lawsuit was filed yesterday (February 27) with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California. CFER will work closely with our partners on this case to **pursue equal justice for all FUSD students and families who deserve fair and equal access to all academic programs**!  
  
If you see any program/activity in your school district that treat students/teachers differently based on race, please do not hesitate to contact us. We will try our best to work with our collaborating attorney groups to launch legal action.  
  
We also understand that not every bad program or initiative can be promptly challenged in a court of law due to many external constraints (mechanisms of the program, timing, resources, availability of willing plaintiffs..). Luckily, the Federal Government is on our side now, ready and willing to take administrative actions against discriminators in public education. I encourage you to check out this [reporting hotline](https://cferfoundation.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=b78c84756813bc7a3a38500a0&id=e7fd5aa033&e=0111f1f5cd) by the U.S. Department of Education and submit pertinent information if your local school district or schools are engaging in any DEI related discrimination.  
  
In the last four years, CFER has filed [seven lawsuits](https://cferfoundation.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=b78c84756813bc7a3a38500a0&id=6166a05fa8&e=0111f1f5cd) to advance equality, winning in three cases so far, thanks to the hard work of our Executive Director Dr. Wenyuan Wu and her small but effective team. To safeguard our state’s constitutional guarantee of equal protection, we will not relent. If you support our legal advocacy work, I hope you will consider making a generous [contribution](https://cferfoundation.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=b78c84756813bc7a3a38500a0&id=4f38e351f3&e=0111f1f5cd) today to help us keep going!

large_9d4f0db9d14e51a889d364d38d40ea92.png

medium_9d4f0db9d14e51a889d364d38d40ea92.png

small_9d4f0db9d14e51a889d364d38d40ea92.png

thumbnail_9d4f0db9d14e51a889d364d38d40ea92.png

9d4f0db9d14e51a889d364d38d40ea92.png

CFER sued Fresno Unified! A quick guide on how you can fight discrimination in your schools.

**_The Real Defenders of Civil Rights!_**

As you may know, for nearly three decades, CFER Executive Vice President Gail Heriot has been working faithfully and diligently to advance equality and civil rights. Professor Heriot served in leadership roles for three successful civil rights campaigns: Yes on Prop. 209 (1996), No on Prop. 16 (2020), and No on ACA 7 (2024).  
  
Recently, Professor Heriot, in her capacity as a U.S. Civil Rights Commissioner, joined Commissioner Peter Kirsanow in a compelling letter to U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy who chairs the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. In the letter, Professor Heriot and Mr. Kirsanow asked Congress to reform college accreditation process by amending existing law to prohibit accrediting agencies from mandating schools to implement diversity requirements and racial preferences. You can read the letter [here](https://strapi-cfer.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/dd978d46179a510e0a6240961caac63c.pdf) and a Wall Street Journal report on it [here](https://www.wsj.com/opinion/congress-can-act-against-college-discrimination-bfb73600).  
  
Professor Heriot’s legislative proposal addresses accreditors, an important pro-diversity and anti-equality player in the “complex webs of state and federal oversight and grant-making authority.” It seeks to remove the undue pressure placed by accreditors on colleges and universities to conform to the woke ideology.  
  
In the coming days, **CFER will work alongside Professor Heriot to promote her civil-rights proposal through awareness building and media outreach**. As we have shown in CFER’s track record, since our founding, we have pursued the real civil rights of equal access and equal protection on a tiny budget (between $250k and 350k every year). Because the vast majority of our donations come from grassroots support, we pinch the penny and spend every dollar with caution and care.  
  
By sharp contrast, when you look at another "civil rights" organization which had **$16,797,759 in revenue, $15,888,677 in expenses, $909,082 in net income and $47,246,990 in net assets** ([from](https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/942161304) its latest Form 990 in 2023), aren't you wondering what they are doing to advance civil rights? **How has** **[Chinese for Affirmative Action](https://caasf.org/)** **(CAA),** **a 501(c)(3) organization founded in 1969**, **been using its $**[**47.2-million**](https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/942161304/202413109349304201/full) **portfolio to further civil rights for Americans of Asian descent?**

![Screenshot 2025-02-26 at 7.40.08 PM.png](https://strapi-cfer.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/1d60d1c80ac2f67e300a58fb05965dee.png)

**_CAA received funding from the federal government (Biden) and major progressive foundations for woke causes unrelated to civil rights_**
  
If civil rights are fundamentally individual rights of equal access/protection, CAA is focused on political priorities antithetical to civil rights. Its main operations, **lushly funded by public taxpayer money and private foundation grants**, perfectly synchronize with evolving demands of progressivism.  
  
In 2024, CAA was [**awarded**](https://www.usaspending.gov/award/ASST_NON_15PBJA24GG02840ADVA_1550) **a $2-million-dolar federal grant by the U.S. Department of Justice to carry out a three-year project for “stop AAPI hate** community-based approaches to prevent and address hate crimes and/or hate incidents.” Does CAA really care about the real discrimination Asian Americans have experienced in K-12 and higher education and the blatant violation of their civil rights as individual Americans as a result? No, they don’t. The agenda they push is all about systemic racism, a flawed political theory with bad consequences impacting the society.  
  
CAA has supported “equitable” criminal justice reforms by [endorsing](https://caasf.org/press-release/asian-and-pacific-islander-civil-rights-organizations-announce-support-for-proposition-47-invest-in-schools-not-prisons/) Prop. 47 in 2014, a notorious proposal contributing to a statewide crime spree. To this end, CAA has [secured](https://www.thelibrafoundation.org/grantee-partners/asian-prisoner-support-committee) **funding from Libra, a grantmaking organization that “prioritizes multi-year, unrestricted grants to frontline, BIPOC-led organizations,” to sponsor the “Asian Prisoner Support Committee (APSC).”** APSC [organizes](https://www.asianprisonersupport.com/) **anti-deportation campaigns, culturally relevant reentry programs and Ethnic Studies lessons for prisoners**.  
  
In 1996, it **participated in the campaign coalition against the California Civil Rights Initiative, which brought the passage of Prop. 209**, our nation’s first statewide constitutional ban on government preferences. Luckily, the campaign failed. But **CAA** [**prides**](https://caasf.org/mission-vision-history/) **itself for playing “a lead role in coordinating opposition (against Prop. 209)**.”  
  
In the 28 years since then, CAA has devoted itself to **systematically sabotaging the constitutional principle of equal protection.** It has **campaigned for** [**SCA 5**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Constitutional_Amendment_5) – a failed proposal to repeal the higher education portion of Prop. 209 in 2014, and then **campaigned for** [**Prop. 16**](https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_16,_Repeal_Proposition_209_Affirmative_Action_Amendment_(2020)) – the ill-fated blanket repeal of Prop. 209 in 2020. Ironically, in a televised [debate](https://www.youtube.com/live/WPsVTez5CYE?si=dYkwDwGcm_zsm3hf) on Prop. 16 four years ago, two CAA representatives accused CFER of “taking dark money.” In reality, **CAA is a multi-million-dollar grift, a large portion of which has unknown origins.**  
  
What is dark money? The money CAA received in the tens of millions but failed to report in compliance with the IRS guidelines. For all 501(c)(3) organizations, IRS requires them to report on [schedule B](https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f990ezb.pdf) about contributions collected more than $5000 that year. However, they never reported. For instance, in 2023, when the organization [reported](https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/942161304) $16.8 million in revenue and $47.2 million in net assets, its IRS filing shows $10.4 million of the revenue as “all other contributions, gifts, grants and similar amounts” with no further detail. CAA has refused to disclose or self-report major donors, classifying such information as “restricted.” Adding in what we’ve found independently, **99% of its 2023 revenue was unaccounted for! Speaking of dark money?!**  
  
The shocking story of CAA is a somber reminder of Eric Hoffer’s famous quibble, that “(e)very great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.” **For CFER, CAA (and many other similar grifts) is a cautionary tale.** CFER will stay devoted to the greater principle of equality – **the true cornerstone of civil rights-** while fend off greed and dogmatism. We can’t do this without grassroots support from you.

Civil rights champion vs. race grifter

State Policies

Local School District Policies

CRT in School Districts

Defund DEI

CFER Research & More

Alliance Building

Endorsement

Join Our Coalition

CFER Foundation

Policies

Research

Alliance

Posts