By Nuala Bishari
Three years ago, San Francisco launched an experiment to give 150 pregnant Black and Pacific Islander women $1,000 a month, no strings attached, for the duration of their pregnancy and six months after the birth.
Half of all maternal deaths in San Francisco each year are Black women, even though they make up only 4% of births. The highest rate of infant deaths — more than 15% — are Black babies, while 10% are Pacific Islander American. San Francisco’s program was a desperate attempt to bridge these health disparities.
Now, that effort is almost certainly about to come to a screeching halt. And another guaranteed income program to assist San Francisco’s transgender residents — who are 18 times more likely to experience homelessness than the general population — already has been shut down. Participants were only given a month’s notice before being cut off.
This was not for lack of local support.
“When the data shows Black expectant mothers have far worse health outcomes or trans people are more likely to end up homeless, we know we can and should invest in these areas to make real change,” Mayor London Breed said in a statement provided to me. “Personally, I’ve seen firsthand how targeted programs like this can transform lives. It’s not just good for the individuals, but for our entire city.”
So, how could two successful programs, lauded by Breed as good-faith efforts to address systemic inequities, be on death’s door?
Put simply: right-wing organizations are targeting local California governments, limiting their ability to help people as they see fit. And they’re winning.
A lawsuit filed in November claimed that because San Francisco’s programs prioritize benefits for people based on gender, race and ethnicity, their use of public funds is discriminatory. The suit was filed by the Californians for Equal Rights Foundation on behalf of two plaintiffs — one of whom is San Francisco mayoral candidate Ellen Zhou. When I dug into the small organization behind the suit, and the Dallas-based lawyers it retained, I found connections to right-wing conspiracy theorists, former California politicians and ties to the Heritage Foundation, which created Project 2025 — the radical Republican blueprint for remaking the government if Donald Trump is reelected president.
That’s some powerful political backing to take on small San Francisco pilot projects. But thanks to the Supreme Court’s affirmative action ruling last year that ended race-based preferences in college admissions, experts tell me lawsuits like this one are a legal slam dunk. And the shuttering of small guaranteed income programs is only the beginning.
“The major mission is to ensure that California public agencies treat people fairly and equally, regardless of our race, ethnicity, and other protected classes,” Frank Xu, president of the Californians for Equal Rights Foundation, told me over Zoom. “Racial preferential policies — including critical race theory, and diversity, equity inclusion — are lowering standards for our next generation.”
The foundation emerged in 2020 after California voters overwhelmingly rejected a renewal of the state’s ability to consider race and gender as a factor in government hiring and contracting, and in public university admissions.
Leveraging this win and the subsequent Supreme Court ruling, Californians for Equal Rights filed three active lawsuits: against San Francisco’s guaranteed income programs, a housing assistance program in San Diego and a policy in Alameda County that requires a share of public construction contracts go to minority- and women-owned businesses.
Californians for Equal Rights lists a staff of seven on its website and an impressive array of advisers. Well-known figures include James Lindsay, an author and right-wing conspiracy theorist; former South Bay U.S. Rep. Tom Campbell; and Michael Gonzalez, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation.
Xu maintains Californians for Equal Rights is a grassroots organization that relies on small donations.
“Our board members are the big donors,” he said. According to its tax filings, the foundation received nearly $300,000 in donations in 2022, approximately half of which went to salaries.
In the suit against San Francisco, it retained the American Civil Rights Project to fight its case, which, among other things, has filed numerous amicus briefs opposing trans rights across the country.
Armed with powerful supporters and legal momentum, we can expect more lawsuits from Californians for Equal Rights.
Statewide, more than 12,000 people receive money through guaranteed income programs. Gov. Gavin Newsom has been an ardent supporter. Forty-four mayors in California joined a network advocating for an income floor. More than 70% of voters in the state support a federal guaranteed income program to provide hundreds of dollars a month to those living below their county’s median income, according to a poll from earlier this year.
For these programs to survive legal challenges, however, race, ethnicity and gender cannot be a factor.
“We believe that the government should not be picking winners and losers on the basis of group characteristics,” Wenyuan Wu, executive director of Californians for Equal Rights, told me. While acknowledging that racism is prevalent, she views these policies as perpetuating the issue. “We have to make sure that the medicine is not worse than the disease. It boils down to almost a metaphysical question: Can we fight discrimination with discrimination?”
Taken at face value, it’s a compelling argument. However, one program named in its suit, the Guaranteed Income Program for Artists, doesn’t prioritize participants based on race, ethnicity or gender. Another, which gives money to Black young adults, is a research project that isn’t funded by the city.
To me, this implies Californians for Equal Rights has a bigger agenda, one that opposes allowing Democratic cities and their residents to help people as they see fit.
Beyond that, the case highlights how right-wing victories at the federal level have started to impact local decision-making. Project 2025 states, “The casual acceptance and rapid spread of racist policymaking in the federal government must be forcefully opposed and reversed.”
There’s no way that forceful opposition will be targeted only at the federal government; an infringement on the ability of local jurisdictions to help those in need is coming down the pipeline.
That should scare all of us. This lawsuit, as small as it may appear, is a dangerous harbinger of what’s to come if Trump returns to the White House.
