The definitions in our glossary are primarily sourced from Nolo’s Plain-English Law Dictionary and Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute. We have made slight modifications where needed for brevity and to better tailor the definitions to the specific needs of users of this website. For more detailed explanations of the terms, users are encouraged to review the definitions on these websites or conduct their own independent research.
CASE NAME
American Alliance for Equal Rights v. Ivey
Overview
Plaintiff challenges an Alabama law requiring the Governor to appoint at least two members “of a minority race” to the nine-member Alabama Real Estate Appraisers Board as well as an Alabama administrative code which states that the board should be inclusive and "reflect the racial, gender, geographic, urban/rural, and economic diversity of the state."
Details
Defendant, Governor Ivey, agrees that the "two-minority" requirement is an "unconstitutional racial quota" but argues that the broader language about diversity is legal because it only provides general guidance. Defendant also argues that even though the "two-minority" requirement is unconstitutional, Plaintiff does not have standing to challenge it because they haven't shown that any of their members were eligible for the position or harmed by the rule.
The Alabama Association of Real Estate Brokers, disagreeing with Governor Ivey's stance on the law, joined the case as a Defendant, arguing that the "two-minority" rule is constitutional.
The court denied Plaintiff's request for a because they couldn't prove they would be seriously harmed without it. On July 17, 2024, after Plaintiff accepted the Governor's interpretation of the general diversity language, the court dismissed that part of the case. The only issue left is Plaintiff's challenge to the "two-minority" requirement.
On June, 5, 2025, the parties settled and the case was dismissed.
Court
U.S. District Court, Alabama Middle District
Status
Filed February 13, 2024 | Settled
Details of the settlement were not publicly disclosed.
Topic
Government programsSignificance
This case provides an example of the far-reaching impact of SFFA with plaintiffs challenging many race-conscious requirements in the public sector.