Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 12 NOVEMBER 2021

Is Self-Identification Antithetical To Remedying Discrimination?

Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
Explore more from Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP

As has been previously discussed in this space, California Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber is seeking dismissal of a federal court challenge to California's director quota mandates - SB 826 and AB 979.

United StatesEmployment and HR

As has been previously discussed in this space, California Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber is seeking dismissal of a federal court challenge to California's director quota mandates - SB 826 and AB 979.  Alliance For Fair Board Recruitment v. Weber,  U.S. Dist. Ct. Case No. 2:21-cv-05644-RGK (RAOx).   In her motion, Secretary Weber asserts:

California's corporate board diversity statutes, enacted as Senate Bill No. 826 (2018) and Assembly Bill No. 979 (2020), further compelling and important state interests in remedying discrimination and promoting diversity in corporate leadership, with attendant benefits to California and its residents.

Both statutes rely upon an individual's self-identification as female and/or a member of an underrepresented community.  Cal. Corp. Code §§ 301.3(f)(1) ("'Female' means an individual who self-identifies her gender as a women, without regard to the individual's designated sex at birth") 301.4(e)(1) ("'Director from an

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from