CASE NAME

Miall et al v. City of Asheville et al

Overview

Plaintiffs, a group of white Asheville residents, argue that Defendants unlawfully use race and ethnicity as criteria when appointing people to the city's Human Relations Commission (HRC).

Details

Defendants filed a , arguing that the issue presented by Plaintiffs was moot. According to Defendants, city ordinances removed any minimum level of diversity among the HRC's membership.

On August 26, 2024, a US Magistrate Judge recommended that Plaintiffs' section 1981 claim be dismissed while the Equal Protection claim be allowed to proceed. Even though the ordinance did not impose quotas or require the appointment of individuals from minority groups, the Plaintiffs alleged that the ordinance—as actually applied and administered by the City—continued to place non-minority applicants on an unequal footing. As such, at this early stage of the litigation, the Magistrate Judge concluded that the matter should be allowed to proceed.

On October 29, 2024, the court accepted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to allow the Equal Protection claim to proceed, but rejected the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to dismiss the section 1981 claim. As such, the case is ongoing.

On September 9, 2025, both parties settled the case.

Court

U.S. District Court, Western District of North Carolina

Status

Filed September 05, 2023 | Settled

In a , the court ordered Defendants to:

  • Eliminate the race, ethnicity, color, and national origin criteria in the ordinance

  • Administer the ordinance without regard to those factors

  • State on the HRCA website any vacant positions and clarify that appointment is not restricted by the factors mentioned above