Systemic Equality: Equal Access, Better Futures
Systemic Equality is A Racial Justice Agenda
Since our nation’s founding, discriminatory policies and laws have created an unequal system in which Black communities have had their civil rights and liberties denied and have been systematically locked out of opportunities in education, housing, employment and more.
Through our Systemic Equality agenda, the ACLU will use nationwide litigation, advocacy, and public education to advance laws and policies rooted in racial equity and end discriminatory policies, laws, and practices that have an outsized impact on Black communities.
The ACLU will also continue to evolve our own culture, systems, and processes to drive progress toward our internal racial justice commitments, including by committing sustained recruitment and hiring efforts to recruit more diverse talent pools, developing initiatives to promote and retain Black leadership, engaging Black-owned and Black-led businesses, and more.
When we have full and equal access to education, jobs, housing, voting rights, and more, better futures are possible.
A Spotlight on Fair Housing
Why Fair Housing is Key to Systemic Equality
Here’s how discrimination continues to impact access to housing today, and why we’re fighting to ensure all people have equal access.
Apply for the ACLU-NBLSA Southern Legal Internship (SLIP) Program
SLIP interns will contribute to crucial campaigns in the issue areas that most affect Black and Brown communities.
Fair Housing
Our goal is to expand access to stable, affordable housing.
Historic and ongoing segregation and discrimination has prevented marginalized groups — particularly Black communities — from accessing safe, affordable housing and home ownership.
Equal access to housing is a civil right. We must work to reduce mass evictions and barriers to housing opportunities that disproportionately impact Black women renters, and restore important housing protections to expand equal access to housing opportunities for everyone.
Everyone deserves equal access to safe and stable housing.
Our fair housing work includes:
- Challenging Mass Evictions and Barriers to Housing Opportunities: Black women and their families make up the demographic group most likely to face eviction in the United States, resulting in a myriad of harms and reinforcing segregation. Our multi-part campaign includes securing the right to counsel in eviction cases, prohibiting the consideration of prior eviction records in tenant screening, and more.
- Advocating for the Right to Representation: We are engaged in right to representation campaigns in Delaware and New Jersey to ensure all people facing eviction have the ability to assert their rights in court.
Historic and ongoing segregation and discrimination has prevented marginalized groups — particularly Black communities — from accessing safe, affordable housing and home ownership.
Equal access to housing is a civil right. We must work to reduce mass evictions and barriers to housing opportunities that disproportionately impact Black women renters, and restore important housing protections to expand equal access to housing opportunities for everyone.
Everyone deserves equal access to safe and stable housing.
Our fair housing work includes:
- Challenging Mass Evictions and Barriers to Housing Opportunities: Black women and their families make up the demographic group most likely to face eviction in the United States, resulting in a myriad of harms and reinforcing segregation. Our multi-part campaign includes securing the right to counsel in eviction cases, prohibiting the consideration of prior eviction records in tenant screening, and more.
- Advocating for the Right to Representation: We are engaged in right to representation campaigns in Delaware and New Jersey to ensure all people facing eviction have the ability to assert their rights in court.
Voting Rights
Our goal is to expand voting access for and build the political power of Black communities.
Black people and communities of color, in particular, have faced numerous obstacles to meaningful participation in the political process, including the redistricting process. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibits the drawing of district lines that dilute the voting strength of communities of color. When Black people and communities of color are minimized through the redistricting process, they are not adequately represented in our democracy, perpetuating the systemic inequality many voters of colors already face.
Redistricting plans should fairly reflect the political strength of communities of color. As data from the last Census confirms, nearly all of the country’s growth over the past decade is attributable to the growth in our nation’s communities of color. Fair maps and voting policies must adequately reflect that reality.
The right to vote should be equally accessible to everyone.
Our voting rights work includes:
- Equal and Fair Political Representation: As part of our ongoing work to ensure legislatures reflect their constituencies and address the longstanding underrepresentation and disempowerment of Black communities, we will advocate for fair voting district maps in six priority states in the South to obtain more equal representation for Black voters.
Black people and communities of color, in particular, have faced numerous obstacles to meaningful participation in the political process, including the redistricting process. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibits the drawing of district lines that dilute the voting strength of communities of color. When Black people and communities of color are minimized through the redistricting process, they are not adequately represented in our democracy, perpetuating the systemic inequality many voters of colors already face.
Redistricting plans should fairly reflect the political strength of communities of color. As data from the last Census confirms, nearly all of the country’s growth over the past decade is attributable to the growth in our nation’s communities of color. Fair maps and voting policies must adequately reflect that reality.
The right to vote should be equally accessible to everyone.
Our voting rights work includes:
- Equal and Fair Political Representation: As part of our ongoing work to ensure legislatures reflect their constituencies and address the longstanding underrepresentation and disempowerment of Black communities, we will advocate for fair voting district maps in six priority states in the South to obtain more equal representation for Black voters.
Criminal Justice
Our goal is to improve public safety by investing in Black communities instead of punishment.
Investing in punishment while undermining what we need for equal and thriving communities has resulted in overcriminalization and the unjust and unequal treatment of our communities — especially Black communities.
We improve public safety by addressing root causes of crime, such as poverty and lack of opportunity, while also focusing on strengthening communities through investments in promising solutions. These include increasing access to affordable housing, jobs, education, health care, and mental health and substance use services in our communities. At the same time, we must work to reduce the number of people incarcerated, surveilled, and criminalized by law enforcement and in the courts. We must challenge dehumanizing conditions in jails and prisons and ensure that people returning to our communities are equipped for success. We must challenge cruel, extreme, and discriminatory punishments such as the death penalty and life without parole. We must work to erect meaningful constitutional guardrails on law enforcement — including jail and prison administrators.
We have the power to choose and to invest in real solutions that increase equality, justice, and safety for all of us.
Our criminal justice work includes:
- Challenging Policing: Part of a larger campaign to reimagine community safety that uses litigation and integrated advocacy to challenge racially-biased policing practices and advance community-based and non-punitive approaches to public safety.
- Shrinking the Geography of Mass Incarceration: An integrated effort, our litigation and advocacy will focus on developing legal challenges to stop funding for the expansion or construction of prisons, jails, and detention centers.
- Ending Racially Discriminatory Jury Selection in the Death Penalty: The jury selection process in death penalty trials, known as “death qualification,” removes otherwise qualified jurors from serving in capital trials based on their opposition to the death penalty. The process discriminates against Black jurors, who are disproportionately opposed to the death penalty. The history of the death penalty in America is inextricably tied to the history of lynching, and the opposition to the death penalty within the Black community is rooted in that history. This disenfranchisement from jury service is a fresh injustice compounding the injustice of racial terror and violence.
Investing in punishment while undermining what we need for equal and thriving communities has resulted in overcriminalization and the unjust and unequal treatment of our communities — especially Black communities.
We improve public safety by addressing root causes of crime, such as poverty and lack of opportunity, while also focusing on strengthening communities through investments in promising solutions. These include increasing access to affordable housing, jobs, education, health care, and mental health and substance use services in our communities. At the same time, we must work to reduce the number of people incarcerated, surveilled, and criminalized by law enforcement and in the courts. We must challenge dehumanizing conditions in jails and prisons and ensure that people returning to our communities are equipped for success. We must challenge cruel, extreme, and discriminatory punishments such as the death penalty and life without parole. We must work to erect meaningful constitutional guardrails on law enforcement — including jail and prison administrators.
We have the power to choose and to invest in real solutions that increase equality, justice, and safety for all of us.
Our criminal justice work includes:
- Challenging Policing: Part of a larger campaign to reimagine community safety that uses litigation and integrated advocacy to challenge racially-biased policing practices and advance community-based and non-punitive approaches to public safety.
- Shrinking the Geography of Mass Incarceration: An integrated effort, our litigation and advocacy will focus on developing legal challenges to stop funding for the expansion or construction of prisons, jails, and detention centers.
- Ending Racially Discriminatory Jury Selection in the Death Penalty: The jury selection process in death penalty trials, known as “death qualification,” removes otherwise qualified jurors from serving in capital trials based on their opposition to the death penalty. The process discriminates against Black jurors, who are disproportionately opposed to the death penalty. The history of the death penalty in America is inextricably tied to the history of lynching, and the opposition to the death penalty within the Black community is rooted in that history. This disenfranchisement from jury service is a fresh injustice compounding the injustice of racial terror and violence.
Economic Justice
Our goal is to reduce the racial wealth gap.
Systemic inequities and barriers keep people — particularly people of color — from accessing the mainstays of economic life; including education, employment, and homeownership; resulting in racial disparities in wealth and income. These disparities result from a combination of ongoing discrimination, structural inequality, and biases across our institutions, and emerge in new forms of technology, including through artificial intelligence, that influence nearly every facet of life.
Through litigation and advocacy, we aim to remedy deeply entrenched sources of inequality and ensure that access to opportunity and the ability to build wealth is available to all.
All people should have an equal opportunity to earn a living, find a home, and get an education.
Our economic justice work includes:
- Exposing Discriminatory Hiring and Lending Tech: Leveraging research and integrated advocacy, we will promote a more equitable approach to AI policy and expose and stop the use of biased, discriminatory hiring and lending technologies that perpetuate hiring and employment discrimination.
Systemic inequities and barriers keep people — particularly people of color — from accessing the mainstays of economic life; including education, employment, and homeownership; resulting in racial disparities in wealth and income. These disparities result from a combination of ongoing discrimination, structural inequality, and biases across our institutions, and emerge in new forms of technology, including through artificial intelligence, that influence nearly every facet of life.
Through litigation and advocacy, we aim to remedy deeply entrenched sources of inequality and ensure that access to opportunity and the ability to build wealth is available to all.
All people should have an equal opportunity to earn a living, find a home, and get an education.
Our economic justice work includes:
- Exposing Discriminatory Hiring and Lending Tech: Leveraging research and integrated advocacy, we will promote a more equitable approach to AI policy and expose and stop the use of biased, discriminatory hiring and lending technologies that perpetuate hiring and employment discrimination.
Education Equity
Our goal is to ensure all students have equal access to high quality education and safe schools.
All students have a right to an equal education, but students of color (particularly Black students), students with disabilities, and low-income youth have historically been marginalized, criminalized, and under-resourced by the public school system.
We will challenge unconstitutional disciplinary policies that disparately target Black students and infringe on their right to a safe learning environment. We will also support race conscious admission policies to increase access to underrepresented groups who face systemic barriers to higher education.
All students deserve equal access to a high quality education, a safe learning environment, and a diverse student body that enriches the educational experiences of all students.
Our education equity work includes:
- Defending Race Conscious Admissions: The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Massachusetts, and the ACLU of North Carolina filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to uphold universities’ ability to consider race in college admissions.
All students have a right to an equal education, but students of color (particularly Black students), students with disabilities, and low-income youth have historically been marginalized, criminalized, and under-resourced by the public school system.
We will challenge unconstitutional disciplinary policies that disparately target Black students and infringe on their right to a safe learning environment. We will also support race conscious admission policies to increase access to underrepresented groups who face systemic barriers to higher education.
All students deserve equal access to a high quality education, a safe learning environment, and a diverse student body that enriches the educational experiences of all students.
Our education equity work includes:
- Defending Race Conscious Admissions: The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Massachusetts, and the ACLU of North Carolina filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to uphold universities’ ability to consider race in college admissions.
How Can We Achieve Systemic Equality?
ACLU Deputy Legal Director Yasmin Cader explains what needs to be done in the fight against systemic racial discrimination in order to create a world in which everyone’s civil rights and liberties are recognized.
Learn More About the Issues on This Page
Related Content
-
Tennessee Supreme CourtApr 2026
Capital Punishment
Tony Von Carruthers V. State Of Tennessee. Explore Case.Tony Von Carruthers v. State of Tennessee
Tennessee plans to execute Tony Carruthers on May 21 even though they refuse to run a simple fingerprint comparison and DNA testing that could prove what Tony has been arguing for 30 years - that he is innocent of this crime and that Tennessee convicted and sentenced the wrong man to death.Status: Ongoing -
Press ReleaseApr 2026
Capital Punishment
Criminal Law Reform
Aclu Demands Dna Testing That Could Prove Innocence Of Tony Carruthers, Man On Tennessee Death Row. Explore Press Release.ACLU Demands DNA Testing That Could Prove Innocence of Tony Carruthers, Man on Tennessee Death Row
MEMPHIS – The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Tennessee filed a motion in the Tennessee Supreme Court today seeking DNA testing that in the case of Tony Carruthers that could prove his innocence. The state plans to execute Mr. Carruthers on May 21 despite unmatched fingerprints and DNA evidence in his case that have never been compared to the most likely alternative suspect identified by Mr. Carruthers’ co-defendant. There has never been any physical evidence linking Mr. Carruthers to the crime and the case against him was built on testimony from jailhouse informants, widely known to be one of the leading causes of wrongful convictions. One of the individuals responsible for the murders later stated that Mr. Carruthers was not involved and instead pointed investigators to another man, Ronnie Irving. Finally, within the last two years, the State Attorney finally admitted what it had successfully hid for three decades – that key State witness Alfredo Shaw was a paid career informant prior to, during, and after Mr. Carruthers trial.’ Meanwhile, there is unidentified DNA on evidence found with the victims that does not match Tony Carruthers and has never been compared to Mr. Irving. The motion filed today asks the court to order comparison of that unknown DNA to Irving and to permit testing of three additional items that have never been analyzed. These items were all found with the victims’ bodies and are likely to contain evidence pointing to the person who is actually responsible for the crime. “Before the state carries out an irreversible punishment, it must answer the most basic question: did they get the right person?” said Maria DeLiberato, senior counsel at the ACLU’s Capital Punishment Project. “Tennessee has the forensic evidence that could help answer that question, and they must test it before it is too late. There is no justification for barreling towards an execution while DNA evidence that could prove who really committed this crime remains untested.” In addition to the DNA evidence, there are five fingerprints recovered from the crime scene that do not match Mr. Carruthers and remain unidentified. A separate motion seeking fingerprint testing that Mr. Carruthers filed pro se in September 2021 is still pending before the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals at Jackson. Mr. Carruthers was forced to represent himself at trial after the court became frustrated with his repeated dismissal of appointed counsel, which was exclusively due to his longstanding and well-documented mental illness. He did not ask to represent himself and instead repeatedly requested an attorney. His self-representation was found to be so prejudicial to his co-defendant James Montgomery, entitling Mr. Montgomery to a new trial. Mr. Montgomery, who was initially sentenced to death was allowed to enter a plea to a reduced charge, sentenced to a term of years, and was released from prison in 2016. If executed, Mr. Carruthers would be the first person in nearly a century to be put to death after being forced to represent himself at trial.Affiliate: Tennessee -
News & CommentaryJan 2026
Capital Punishment
Executions Spiked In 2025, But The Death Penalty Is Still Losing Ground. Explore News & Commentary.Executions Spiked in 2025, but the Death Penalty Is Still Losing Ground
As executions surged to their highest level in years, public support, jury verdicts, and new death sentences continued a historic decline—exposing a punishment sustained by political power, not public will.By: Cassandra Stubbs -
Press ReleaseDec 2025
Capital Punishment
Aclu Condemns Florida Supreme Court Decision Upholding Non-unanimous Capital Juries. Explore Press Release.ACLU Condemns Florida Supreme Court Decision Upholding Non-Unanimous Capital Juries
TALLAHASSEE – The Florida Supreme Court upheld Florida’s law allowing non-unanimous juries to sentence people to death upon a vote of 8-4, meaning a person can be sentenced to death in the state even if a third of the jury votes for life. The court’s decision came in a pair of cases, Jackson v. Florida and Hunt v. Florida, brought by two men sentenced to death by non-unanimous juries. The American Civil Liberties Union represents Mr. Michael Jackson, who was sentenced to death in 2007, despite 4 jurors voting for a life sentence. In 2016, the Florida Supreme Court declared non-unanimous sentencings unconstitutional after a Supreme Court decision ruled that Florida’s capital sentencing statute violated the Sixth Amendment. For years, Mr. Jackson waited to be re-sentenced under the law of unanimity, but weeks before his long-awaited retrial, the Florida legislature reinstated non-unanimous juries, and he was sentenced to death by another 8-4 jury. “Allowing a death sentence by a divided jury betrays the founders’ vision of the jury as a cornerstone of democracy and a protection against government overreach,” said Megan Byrne, senior staff attorney at the ACLU’s Capital Punishment Project. “Non-unanimous juries increase the risk of wrongful convictions and can operate to silence the voices of jurors of color. Florida’s high court has made clear that the state values speed and finality over accuracy and justice. We will be asking the Supreme Court to review this decision and reaffirm that the Constitution provides the right to a fair trial and a unanimous jury when life is at stake.” Florida is one of only two states to allow divided juries to sentence people to death and has the most extreme law in the country. As Justice Labarga of the Florida Supreme Court acknowledged in his separate opinion, “the 8-4 threshold renders Florida the absolute outlier among states that impose the death penalty. Florida now has the lowest standard in the nation, requiring the fewest number of jurors to recommend the death penalty.” Florida legislators enacted the non-unanimity law in 2023 despite a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that unanimity is required for guilty verdicts in all cases where a defendant is charged with a serious offense. In that decision, the Supreme Court called out the racist origins of non-unanimity laws which states specifically designed to silence the voices of Black jurors. Non-unanimous sentencing schemes also heighten the risk of executing the innocent. Florida has had 30 exonerations from death row — the most capital exonerations of any state in the country. Of those, the vast majority (19) of exonerees were sentenced by non-unanimous juries. “More than 200 innocent people have been exonerated from death rows across America since 1976,” said Daniel Tilley, legal director of the ACLU of Florida. “Non-unanimous juries only amplify the risk that innocent people will be sentenced to death. Dissenting jurors often raise concerns about credibility, evidence, or mitigation, and non-unanimity allows someone to be sentenced to death despite unresolved doubt. When the stakes are life or death, we cannot afford to settle for anything less than what the Constitution promises.” Michael Hunt, the second man challenging non-unanimity, was arrested and charged with capital murder in 2018, when Florida law required the jury to be unanimous in any death recommendation. His trial was delayed until 2023, by which point the Florida legislature and courts had walked back the protection of unanimity. The jury convicted him unanimously, but voted only 10-2 for his death sentence. Had the jury issued this decision only six months earlier, Florida law would have required a life sentence. Read more about Mr. Jackson’s case here: https://www.aclu.org/cases/michael-jackson-v-state-of-floridaCourt Case: Michael Jackson v. State of FloridaAffiliate: Florida