“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.”
Our country has struggled to live up to this principle for nearly 250 years. We fought a Civil War and amended the Constitution to guarantee the “equal protection of the laws” for “all persons.” Brave men and women who opposed Jim Crow unflinchingly fought and died for equality in the Civil Rights Movement.
We fight to enforce structural limitations on government power.
We hold bureaucrats to the rule of law. Rogue government officials at the local, state and federal level who act beyond the authority given to them must be reined in. The Limited Government Project project stands at the forefront of that fight, litigating cases in state and federal court to ensure that government officials act within their lawful authority.
Discrimination is discrimination
On June 29, 2023, the United States Supreme Court decided that colleges and universities may no longer use race as a factor in admissions. This practice, commonly called “affirmative action,” was declared unconstitutional in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard.
The decision, however, has much broader implications: it confirms that our Constitution is “colorblind” and that governments may not treat their citizens differently based on race. The Court explained that the Constitution demands “absolute equality of all citizens.” Exceptions to this rule are exceedingly rare, reserved for situations like preserving order in a prison, or to remedy the government’s own past intentional discrimination. Governments may not use race to cure “societal discrimination,” “systemic racism,” or to advance modern-day notions of “diversity” and “equity.” In the Court’s words, “eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all racial discrimination.”
Additionally, the Court’s broad language implicates practices outside the bounds of the Constitution—namely, private affirmative action programs or “diversity, equity, and inclusion” initiatives. Harvard, after all, is a private college and its program was evaluated under the law governing programs receiving federal financial assistance (Title VI). The Court concluded that this statute contains the same protections against discrimination as the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause, and that Harvard’s use of race in admitting students was unlawful under that statute. Title VI contains language that is identical to or functionally similar to a variety of federal laws, including, for example, the statute prohibiting discrimination by private businesses (Title VII). The Students for Fair Admission decision, therefore, has the potential to upend not only government-sanctioned discrimination, but even race-based private conduct pursued in the name of “diversity, equity, and inclusion.” Put simply, the decision calls into question a whole panoply of race-based programs in the public and private sectors.
80
Clients represented
25
States Impacted
Since January 2021, WILL has represented 80 clients from 25 states who are standing up for equality under law.
A Road Map
Days before Donald Trump’s Inaguration, WILL laid out a comprehensive strategy to bring true equality back to the federal government.
Now with the new administration’s latest commitments to end DEI and taxpayer-funded discrimination, we are keeping track. You can stay up to date by clicking below:

Featured Case
Citizens Defending Liberty v. Evers
WILL filed a new lawsuit challenging the Wisconsin Supplier Diversity Program, a procurement program that spends over $250 million each year purchasing supplies and services based on race. White, Middle Eastern, and most Asian small-business owners are ineligible for this program simply because of their race.
Brown County Taxpayers v. Evers
Thirty-three years after Wisconsin voters amended the Constitution to prevent future gambling expansions, lawmakers enacted Act 247 without another voter-approved…
WILL Represents Concordia Professor Suspended for Criticizing Woke Direction of University
UPDATE: A Settlement Has Been Reached… Read More Here. On Saturday, February 19, 2022, Concordia University Wisconsin suspended Rev. Dr.…
WILL Warns of Lawsuit Against DEI Grant Program in Wisconsin
WILL issued a formal cease-and-desist to the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC), the ColorBold Business Association, SCORE Mentors, and UW-Madison regarding the “Entrepreneur of Color Collective Grant” (ECC Grant). The grant, funded by a $95,000 WEDC investment from Governor Tony Evers, illegally bars business owners from applying based solely on their skin color.
CDC Labels Minority Neighborhoods as “Vulnerable,” Encouraging the Spread of DEI Spending Nationwide
In new findings provided to the Trump Administration’s Health and Human Services (HHS) agency, WILL has uncovered that the Center for Disease Control (CDC) uses a race-based criteria to declare whole communities and neighborhoods as “socially vulnerable” based on the number of minorities living there. Cities and states around the country rely on the CDC’s “social vulnerability index” (SVI) to allocate taxpayer funding for parks, drinking water, and disaster assistance.
YAF v SBA
WILL and the Center for Individual Rights (CIR) filed a major lawsuit against the Trump Administration today, targeting the foundation for many of the remaining federal DEI programs: the preference for so-called “socially disadvantaged individuals.”
WILL Warns States About New Risks Federal Highway Funding if Woke Policies Remain
WILL, a conservative law firm with a proven track record of winning discrimination-in-contracting cases, is threatening legal action against Illinois Governor JB Pritzker’s Department of Transportation (ILDOT) as well as several other states who are refusing to comply with a recent Trump Administration directive to suspend all race- and gender quotas in the federally funded “Disadvantaged Business Enterprise” (DBE) program.
WILL Uncovers Multi-Million Dollar Race-Based School Funding Scheme
WILL filed a new federal complaint against the Jefferson County Public School District (JCPS) in Louisville, Kentucky, after discovering a race-based funding scheme that allocates funds to students based on the color of their skin.
Faust v. Rollins (USDA)
WILL sued the Trump Administration’s Department of Agriculture (USDA) over several discriminatory programs that deny financial assistance to farmers based on race and sex. WILL filed this lawsuit on behalf of our client, Adam Faust, a Wisconsin dairy farmer.
Filter Cases
Choose one or more filters to narrow the cases shown.
Case Status
Case Team
Sort Cases
Choose how you want the case list to be ordered.
Alphabetical
Date Filed
Case Activity
Media
WSJ | Race Preferences Are Falling Nationwide
WILL’s historic win at the Wisconsin Supreme Court was featured in the WSJ.
Read More
NY Times| Should Any Programs Help Minority Groups? In Lawsuits, Conservatives Say No.
WILL’s push to dismantle DEI was on the front page of the NYT.
Read More
NY Post | Education Department scraps Biden-era race-based rules for doctoral degree grants
WILL’s victory dismantling an unconstitutional Biden-Harris Era program was featured in the NY Post.
Read MoreMore Litigation Categories
Individual Liberties
Constitutional Government and Rule of Law
Economic Freedom
Education Reform