Sat. Dec 14th, 2024

Matthew J. Perry Jr. U.S. Courthouse in Columbia. (Abraham Kenmore/SC Daily Gazette)

A Myrtle Beach-area woman of Chinese and Cuban heritage is suing to get a spot on South Carolina’s Commission for Minority Affairs, claiming state law treats her as the wrong kind of minority.

The lawsuit, filed by Sandy Chiong in federal court Wednesday, challenges the 1993 state law that created the agency, which requires a majority-Black governing board.

The specification that most of the board’s nine members “must be African American” violates the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, the lawsuit claims.

“In America, government positions are supposed to be open to all citizens — not restricted to members of favored groups,” Chiong’s lawyers wrote in court documents. “A racial quota prevents her from being considered for a position on an equal basis with other candidates.”

The suit names Gov. Henry McMaster, since the law tasks the governor with appointing members of the commission, with the Senate’s confirmation. The governor’s office has not yet been notified by the court of the lawsuit and declined Friday to comment.

A spokesperson for the minority affairs agency also said the agency had no comment on the lawsuit and did not answer questions from the SC Daily Gazette about the history of the commission and what it does.

The commission’s governing board is made up of one person from each of South Carolina’s seven congressional districts, as well as two at-large seats.

“This means that at least five of the nine Commission slots are prohibited from going to Americans of any other racial background — whether white, Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, multiracial, or other,” the lawyers argue in court documents. “The statute offers no justification whatsoever for this categorical race-based restriction.”

When the Legislature established the Commission for Minority Affairs, the agency focused on addressing “inequities impacting African American communities,” hence the legislative mandate that its membership reflect the population it was formed to serve. In 2003, its scope was broadened to include Asian Americans, Hispanic and Latino Americans, and Native Americans, according to agency documents, but the language governing board makeup remained in place.

Black residents are the largest racial minority in South Carolina, at 26% of the state population according to U.S. Census Bureau data. Hispanic residents make up 7.5% of the population, followed by 2% Asian and less than 1% Native American.

Chiong, is the daughter of Cuban immigrants, and is of Chinese, Cuban, and Spanish descent.

Both Chiong’s maternal and paternal grandfather immigrated from China to Cuba.

“Years later, her parents left Cuba for a better life in America, instilling in her an appreciation for constitutional rights,” according to a statement from the Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative, California-based public interest law firm representing Chiong. “Sandy’s immigrant background and Chinese Cuban ancestry made the Commission an ideal choice, but she’s disadvantaged for consideration because she’s not African American.”

Currently, seats for the 3rd and 4th congressional districts, as well as one at-large member, are vacant. Two members are serving past the expiration of their term in what’s known as holdover status, including the member representing the 7th district where Chiong lives.

That means only four members of the commission are serving active terms, three of which have terms expiring next July, the lawyers argue.

The lawsuit is part of a larger, conservative-led movement against these types of policies across the country meant to increase minority representation, as well as those involving concepts of diversity, equity and inclusion.

Chiong has ties to Republican politics, serving as a South Carolina delegate to the Republican National Convention in 2016. She’s also a member of South Carolina Parents Involved in Education, a conservative group opposed to teaching critical race theory in South Carolina schools.

Chiong did not respond before deadline to questions from the SC Daily Gazette about what prompted her to seek appointment to the commission.

Chiong’s case marks the Pacific Legal Foundation’s seventh active case involving race or gender-based government board membership requirements, though most of the other boards being challenged are related to a licensed profession, according to her attorney Caleb Trotter.

Trotter said his organization already has been successful in getting gender-based rules overturned for a board in Iowa that recommends judicial appointees and race-based rules for the board that licenses social workers in Arkansas.

Pacific Legal Foundation’s cases rely on similar arguments to those made in the 2023 U.S. Supreme Court decision rolling back affirmative action in college admissions. Trotter said while that decision is “directly relevant” to this case, it was not the organization’s impetus for filing this and similar lawsuits around the country.

Other states where the group is part of these types of lawsuits include Tennessee, Minnesota, Montana, Alabama, Lousiana and North Carolina.

By