Backlash Surrounds NYC Councilwoman’s Remarks on Certification and Race
The recent comments made by New York City Councilwoman Julie Won have ignited considerable controversy, drawing criticism for what many deem a racially motivated stance on eligibility for the city’s Minority and Women-owned Business Enterprise (M/WBE) certification program. The spotlight is now on the potentially discriminatory nature of her assertions, with influential voices urging the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate. Critics argue that such remarks are not only inflammatory but also possibly unlawful, placing the issue within the framework of federal anti-discrimination laws.
At a committee hearing, Won explicitly stated, “You’re going to have to get the certification numbers UP so that we actually have people of color who are certified, not just white women.” These words, captured on video and widely circulated, triggered immediate backlash, prompting accusations that her comments advocate for a form of exclusion based on race, which runs counter to the civil rights protections established by Title VI and VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
With the current administration intensifying its scrutiny of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, the timing of this controversy could not be more significant. The DOJ’s Civil Rights Division is already exercising its powers under the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative to assess whether racial or gender-based preferences in public contracts violate established civil rights principles. Legal experts argue that Won’s pronouncements may conflict with federal guidelines prohibiting discrimination based on race, color, or sex.
“If a government official is directing agencies to prioritize contracting opportunities for individuals based on race, to the detriment of others, that could constitute a violation of Title VI,” one civil rights attorney noted. His comments underscore the risks that local governments could face if they fail to maintain legal compliance in their affirmative action policies.
The M/WBE program is designed to empower both women and minority business owners, allowing them access to a significant share of city contracts, totaling around $30 billion annually. Recent data indicates that out of the roughly 10,500 certified businesses, about 6,200 are women-owned. However, the distribution by race among these certified businesses has been called into question. Won’s push for increased representation specifically for people of color opens up a contentious debate around the validity and legality of the existing demographic framework used for these certifications.
Critics assert that questioning eligibility based on race, even when gender criteria are met, can lead to unconstitutional actions. As a council staffer noted, “Julie Won just said out loud what many officials quietly think—that the city should exclude white women from equity programs, even if they qualify under the law. That’s not equity. That’s a racial quota.” This sentiment highlights a growing concern about how race-based policies can lead to exclusion rather than inclusion.
Conservative voices have urged federal intervention from the DOJ, following the department’s scrutiny of similar DEI policies in other cities. Practices linked to hiring and service distribution have been evaluated for adherence to civil rights standards. The DOJ’s investigation into Austin’s explicit racial equity expectations regarding hiring may serve as a precedent for assessing the certification practices in New York City.
Importantly, the DOJ’s Civil Rights Fraud Initiative empowers investigators to scrutinize various contracting structures and requires compliance from recipients of federal funding. This could have profound implications if violations are found, resulting in fines or stricter oversight under the False Claims Act.
Legal scholars point to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard as a pivotal moment that has narrowed permissible race-based classifications. By rejecting affirmative action in college admissions and applying stringent scrutiny to race-based policies, the Court’s decision adds another layer of risk to government programs that attempt to differentiate services based on race.
“Whether you’re talking about contractor preferences or college seats, if you’re deciding who benefits based on race, the courts—and now the DOJ—are watching,” emphasized a former DOJ civil rights official. This statement encapsulates the growing anxiety surrounding race-based policy initiatives in light of increasing legal scrutiny.
Executive Order 14173, signed in early 2024, bolsters federal oversight and mandates that contractors certify compliance with nondiscrimination laws. Furthermore, it establishes penalties for any misrepresentation regarding compliance, which will further fortify legal scrutiny around the practices initiated by officials like Won.
As calls for investigations gather steam, the New York City Council remains largely silent. Attempts by colleagues to distance themselves from Won’s remarks suggest a recognition of the legal intricacies surrounding race-based contracting. Though the M/WBE program persists, it’s likely that greater scrutiny will follow, particularly if the DOJ chooses to proceed with an investigation. The stakes are high, and outcomes could lead to substantial changes in contracting practices across the city.
The ongoing fallout raises essential questions regarding public policy’s relationship with race. As discussions surrounding equitable practices evolve, attention will remain fixed on how such policies can align with current civil rights law. As one legal analyst aptly noted, “If the government cannot grant a contract based on race, then surely it cannot deny one based on it either.” The implications of this tension will continue to resonate throughout public policy debates.
"*" indicates required fields
