Georgia Injury Lawyer Blog
By: Julie Oinonen as NELA-GA President
I recently spoke in my role as the President of the National Employment Lawyer’s Association of Georgia during the luncheon at our recent NELA-GA Employment Law CLE on our duties as lawyers to the rule of law. The following is my “Call to action” to you and to each of us as lawyers:
The U.S. Constitution is our nation’s fundamental law. It codifies the core values of our country, of us as a people and if any law passed by the legislature, conflicts with the Constitution, Judges are to always defer to the Constitution as the fundamental rule of law. And because there are certain principles that are so important to our nation, the Bill of Rights was passed because principles such as freedom of religion, freedom of speech, equality, and due process of law were deemed so important that, barring a Constitutional Amendment, no one, even when they are in the White House should be able to change them.
Founding Father and second President of the United States John Adams famously wrote that the rule of law at its most essential means a “government of laws and not of men” and the rule of law is “a principle of governance in which all persons, institutions and entities, public and private, including the State itself, are accountable to the laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced and independently adjudicated.” In other words, the rule of law anticipates that duly passed laws are enforceable against all people, including the government and government actors, no matter the position or office they may hold.
We have witnessed over the past year a concerted attack on the rule of law and our democracy. Lawyers and Bar Associations around the country have bravely spoken out against these attacks, including groups of lawyers who have bandied together to speak out, such as our own National Employment Lawyers Association, our GA chapter, other groups like Georgia Lawyers for the Rule of Law, Inc. and, the American Bar Association, the largest group in the country–a fully non-partisan organization of American lawyers, who in the spring of 2025 made a call to action to lawyers stating and I quote: “across the country, the rule of law is being tested — not just in courtrooms, but in classrooms, statehouses, and within the public discourse. Public servants penalized for doing their jobs. Calls to impeach judges for their decisions. A pattern of resistance to court orders. There is a government-wide attack on diversity. Civic norms were eroding. Threats, retribution and coarse language characterized how government officials treated those who disagreed with them. We witnessed the dehumanization of people and the violation of their civil and human rights. These all continue today. Throughout these last few months, many within the profession have asked: Should we speak? But the more important question facing the ABA was: What happens if we don’t?”
Fortunately, the ABA and other professional associations as mentioned our very own National Employment Lawyers Association, and our state chapter the NELA-GA have courageously chosen to speak out. Because the rule of law does not defend itself. Lawyers do. This is our professional and ethical duty as lawyers to the rule of law. This is in compliance with our sworn oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Georgia. So help me God.” Our commitment to the rule of law is not merely a set of rules. It is a calling that we have as lawyers who swore this oath to uphold the Constitution when we first became lawyers, when we raised our hands, when we affirmed that promise. We stand up for the principles that have served our country for 250 years.
The National Employment Lawyers Association (NELA national) and its state and local Affiliates who included NELA-GA, with more than 3000 plaintiffs’ employment lawyer members across the nation, stood firmly with other bar associations, law firms, and civil rights organizations “to stand up for democracy and reaffirm our commitment to upholding the rule of law as a cornerstone of justice, fairness, and democracy. All individuals and institutions, including those with power and status, are accountable under the rule of law; it is the foundation from which the rights of workers and the principles of equality are realized.”
As part of the statement NELA-GA adopted was: “At a time when the integrity of our legal system faces unprecedented challenges, NELA will continue to defend the independence of our judiciary, the impartial application of laws, the transparency of legal processes, and the independence of the legal profession. Any weakening of these checks and balances endangers the very heart of our nation’s democracy. As NELA marks four decades of impact and advocacy, we draw strength from our history of persistence in the face of adversity. We stand united with those who advocate for the fair and equitable treatment of all individuals under the law. NELA National and our state chapter NELA-GA calls on members of the legal community, lawmakers, and members of the judiciary to recommit to these principles, recognizing that a just society thrives only when the rule of law is preserved.”
Thus began a steady drumbeat of messages—from bar associations who included NELA national, NELA-GA– reaffirming our commitment to rule of law, due process, access to justice, fairness and diversity and reminded the nation that the rule of law is the backbone of our democracy.
The administration’s efforts to dismantle the rule of law have come in many forms. “The President has invoked the Unitary Executive Theory to claim that he has the absolute authority to decide what is and is not within the President’s Article II powers. The administration has insisted that its use of the Alien Enemies Act and the Immigration and Nationality Act to deport people without a hearing or any due process, even lawful permanent residents, is not subject to review by a court. The President has threatened to wield government power to undermine First Amendment speech and association rights and enforce speech codes against private actors, including universities and law firms, whose speech and association the President disapproves of.”
In Nov 2025, a federal judge named Mark L. Wolf warned of an “existential threat to democracy” in a searing first-person essay published recently in the Atlantic magazine saying he had stepped down from the bench to speak out against President Trump. He accused Trump of “using the law for partisan purposes, targeting his adversaries while sparing his friends and donors from investigation, prosecution, and possible punishment.”
The judge, Mark L. Wolf, wrote in The Atlantic magazine that Mr. Trump’s actions were “contrary to everything that I have stood for in my more than 50 years in the Department of Justice and on the bench.” The publication of the essay by Judge Wolf, 78, came two days after an announcement by the Federal District Court for Massachusetts that he was leaving his post as a senior-status judge.
In 1985, President Ronald Reagan had appointed Judge Wolfe after a career in public service with the Department of Justice seeking to restore confidence in the integrity of the department after the corruption of President Nixon. President Gerald Ford told the DOJ that he wanted the attorney general to “protect the rights of American citizens, not the President who appointed him.”
Judge Wolf would became the deputy United States attorney and chief federal prosecutor of public corruption in Massachusetts prosecuting mobsters, and the rich and powerful, including the former speaker of the Mass House of Representatives who was convicted of demanding and accepting bribes. Judge Wolf would receive the Attorney General’s Distinguished Service Award and was later appointed a federal judge. Judge Wolf wrote that he was committed to “deciding all of my cases based on the facts and the law, without regard to politics, popularity, or my personal preferences.” He stated: “That is how justice is supposed to be administered—equally for everyone, without fear or favor. This is the opposite of what is happening now.”
Judge Wolf has stated and I quote: “What Nixon did episodically and covertly, knowing it was illegal or improper, Trump now does routinely and overtly. Prosecutorial decisions during this administration are a prime example. We have seen how the President in social media posting, instructed Attorney General Pam Bondi to seek indictments against three political adversaries even though the officials in charge of the investigations at the time saw no proper basis for doing so. We have seen how offices that could and should investigate possible corruption are being dismantled, 18 inspectors general who were responsible for detecting and deterring fraud and misconduct in major federal agencies. The FBI’s public-corruption squad also has been eliminated. The Department of Justice’s public-integrity section has been eviscerated, reduced from 30 lawyers to only five, and its authority to investigate election fraud has been revoked. We have seen executive orders issued that are unconstitutional or otherwise illegal. For example, contrary to the express language of the Fourteenth Amendment, one order declares that not everyone born in this country is a U.S. citizen. We have seen the administration also has deported undocumented immigrants without due process, in many cases to countries where they have no connections and will be in great danger. We have seen undocumented immigrants made up of families and children torn apart and terrorized by masked men. We have seen the rights of both the undocumented and US citizens infringed upon. Although many federal judges have issued orders restraining the government’s effort to implement those executive orders, some appear to have been disobeyed by members of the Trump administration. We have seen Trump has responded by calling for federal judges to be impeached, even though the Constitution permits impeachment only for “high crimes and misdemeanors,” such as treason and bribery. “We have seen Trump’s angry attacks on the courts have coincided with an unprecedented number of serious threats against judges, credible death threats.”
Even recently, we have even seen a South Carolina’s judges house explode on fire, her son and husband (a former senator) having to jump out of it to survive just a month after this judge blocked the South Carolina Election Commission from providing the Department of Justice with millions of voter files that included personal names, addresses, driver’s license numbers and social security numbers.
Chief Justice John Roberts reminded us in May: “Judicial independence is crucial…to check the excesses of Congress or the executive.” He added that impeachment is “not how you register disagreement with decisions.”
Lawyers and judges—-we are the last stop at safeguarding democracy, protecting human rights, and combatting corruption. We must defend our judicial system against attacks that seek to intimidate and threaten our courts and judges. We reject the repeated efforts to impeach and remove judges because the government does not agree with the decision. We condemn attacks on lawyers and law firms for representing clients who have challenged a government policy.
As Judge Wolf reminded us—countries ruled by corrupt leaders who rank among the worst abusers of human rights jail their political opponents, suppress independent media that could expose their wrongdoing, forbid free speech, punish peaceful protests, and frustrate every effort to establish an independent, impartial judiciary that could constrain these abuses. These authoritarian governments have impunity in their countries because they control the police, prosecutors, and courts.
The Law to Remedy the Distress of the People and the Reich was also known as the Enabling Act. Passed on March 23, 1933, and proclaimed the next day, it became the cornerstone of Adolf Hitler’s dictatorship. The act allowed Hitler to enact laws, including ones that violated the Constitution, without approval of either parliament or Reich President. We are right now in a moment in time where we are at an important turning point of history once more. And both our actions and inactions will create the future of our country. We must not fail and we must not fall on the wrong side of history.
One disappointing development that we have seen during these times is the lack of moral courage that has been shown by many institutions, certain law firms as well as major universities, even my own beloved Emory University of which I sit on the Law School Alumni board watching them capitulate to the extortionist threats that have been made by the Administration threatening to withhold federal funding unless they abolish DEI programs. If the attacks on universities and law firms are troubling, the surrender, the capitulation, the lack of moral backbone they have shown by agreeing to end their diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs, to stop fighting against the president’s illegalities, and even law firms that have agreed to do pro bono work for Trump-approved causes is the most disturbing. This is a time where we as a profession must stand up rather then bend the knee by taking the coward’s way out.
As employment attorneys who are committed to the rule of law, and to enforcing the laws that prohibit discrimination in the workplace and promote equality of opportunity for all, this is completely compatible with principles of diversity, equity and inclusion. Diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility are core values of the National Employment Lawyers Association and are essential to the achievement of our mission as well as our work hand in hand with the EEOC working to end discrimination in the workplace and insure equal opportunity for all.
Many of us have first-hand seen the uptick in race discrimination cases because of corporate America and universities which have kowtowed to the white house’s illegal executive orders and engaged in shameful rollback of DEI programs.
This past year, the National Employment Lawyers Association (NELA) and the National Institute for Workers’ Rights (NIWR) issued formal warnings to Target, Meta and Tractor Supply Co., stating that eliminating diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives could expose companies to heightened legal liability for discrimination litigation. The letters argue that rolling back these initiatives would open the door for bias against women, people of color and other underrepresented groups, and may be used as evidence against employers in discrimination litigation. A recently published article made headlines for a shocking stat: nearly 300,000 Black women have exited the American labor force in the last three months. The article attributes the mass exodus to reasons like federal job cuts and the dismantling of DEI programs. In the private sector, DEI budgets have been slashed or frozen. Job postings for DEI roles dropped by 43 percent between August 2022 and July 2024, and the total number of DEI positions fell from 20,000 in 2023 to 17,500 by April 2025. Companies have also scaled back mentorship programs, slowed inclusive hiring, and deprioritized equity benchmarks — treating DEI as expendable — even as the data proves otherwise. We have all seen this as employment lawyer, the recent uptick in race discrimination cases and clients that have come to us. Removing diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives allows biases to operate unchecked, increasing the likelihood of discriminatory practices and thus the risk of legal liability, so rather than abandoning these efforts, organizations should strengthen them, knowing that they are both legally sound and smart business as the path to truly merit-based workplaces includes active measures to ensure all qualified individuals have genuine opportunities to contribute and succeed.
Diversity, equity and inclusion programs emerged as a means to ensure employers comply with the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act.
And this is where both plaintiff and defense lawyers can work together as colleagues, as fellow members of the bar. As lawyers that represent employers, you can work with your clients to insure that they do not throw the baby out with the bathwater. That they understand that Title VII, the civil rights act of 1964 does not prohibit DEI programs that focus on outreach, inclusion, anti discrimination, removing structural barriers, that you can focus on helping them achieve fairness and inclusion for all employees, programs that are open to all employees who wish to participate, and DEI programs that are in full compliance with civil rights laws. Examples of this are:
• Universal leadership academies open to all
• Targeted outreach (not targeted selection)
• Employee resource groups (voluntary, open membership)
• Pay equity audits
• Workplace civility / anti-bias/anti-discrimination training
• Mentoring programs open to anyone
Here are a few clear, persuasive lines for you to use in defense of your client’s DEI programs:
🔹 “DEI is about removing barriers, not moving standards.”
🔹 “This initiative strengthens fairness and compliance for everyone.”
🔹 “DEI is education, transparency, and equal opportunity — not preference.”
🔹 “Ames v. Ohio Dept. Of Youth Services did not restrict DEI; it reaffirmed neutral application of civil rights laws.”
🔹 “Good DEI protects against discrimination rather than causing it.”
🔹 “We train people to follow the law — that’s not only legal, it’s necessary.”
As Plaintiff lawyers, the lawyers who advocate for workers rights we will work with you in support of these endeavors.
Encouraging companies to completely abolish DEI programs rolls back decades of progress and as Target has found out first hand, is simply bad for business. For those of you who are not aware of the Target Black led boycott due to its DEI rollbacks, Sales have stalled, and the company reported a drop in profits in the third quarter of 2025,: Target has reported flat or declining comparable sales in eight of the last 10 quarters, The company’s stock has declined significantly, dropping 37% over the past year, and CEO Brian Cornell stepped down in 2025 amid these issues. But even most, DEI programs helped address the issue that discrimination in the workplace is illegal and unacceptable. Removing such programs sends a contrary message, that its okay to be racist now, and yes, the racists are coming out of the woodwork and emboldened to say and do things that several years ago they wouldn’t have dared. And when that happens, we will take those cases, and we will sue those employers.
You as a Defense lawyer can ward off this liability by insuring that DEI programs are safeguarded. You can defend DEI by showing:
1. It is neutral.
2. It is inclusive.
3. It improves fairness.
4. It does not require preferential treatment.
5. Decisions remain based on qualifications.
6. The company treats all employees equally under Title VII.
Done right, DEI is not a liability—it is a compliance tool, a business tool, and a fairness tool. It is a way to comply with the rule of law which is not only rooted in our Civil Rights Acts, but within our constitution—standing for the principles of equality and equal protection for all without regard to race, gender, or other protected classes.
Each one of you as defense lawyers and plaintiff lawyers can make a difference in standing up for the rule of law. Senator Robert F. Kennedy said in 1966 about ending apartheid in South Africa: “Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring, those ripples build a current which can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.” We must defend law firms and organizations who are being attacked for their commitment to a judicial system and profession that are free of bias and for their policies and programs that enhance diversity. These attacks undermine our system of justice, our rule of law, and the principles of equality and justice that define who we are and how democracy works.
There are times where it is very easy to get discouraged. However, my message to you is to Keep going. Keep it up. Continue to be brave, continue to be bold. Do not give up. We need you. Ours is the most crucial profession in America today, we have the power to capitulate or to fight. So let’s fight. Let’s fight for the rule of law, Let’s fight for our democracy.
Footnotes:
https://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/overview-rule-law
Id,
https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2025/07/when-lawyers-speak-america-listens/
https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2025/07/when-lawyers-speak-america-listens/
https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2025/07/when-lawyers-speak-america-listens/
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2025/11/federal-judge-resignation-trump/684845/
Id.
Id.
Id.
Id.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2025/11/federal-judge-resignation-trump/684845/
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/06/isouth-carolina-judge-home-fire
https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2025/07/when-lawyers-speak-america-listens/
https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2025/03/aba-rejects-efforts-to-undermine-courts-and-legal-profession/
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2025/11/federal-judge-resignation-trump/684845/
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/the-enabling-act
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/emory-university-disbanding-dei-betrays-schools-progressive-reputation-rcna230260
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/19/us/politics/false-claims-act-dei-harvard.html#:~:text=Ties%20to%20China-,Justice%20Dept.%20to%20Use%20False%20Claims%20Act%20to%20Pursue%20Institutions,Bondi%20said%20in%20a%20statement.
https://niwr.org/2025/04/08/release-risk-eliminating-dei-programs/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/janicegassam/2025/08/04/no-friends-in-the-pipeline-why-300000-black-women-were-pushed-out-of-the-workforce/
300,000 Black women have left the labor force in 3 months. It’s not a coincidence.
https://niwr.org/2025/05/20/policy-brief-how-dei-combats-discrimination/#_edn6
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2013/06/30/197342656/looking-back-rfks-ripple-of-hope-speech-in-south-africa