1 hour ago
The New York Times revenge a counterclaim to a suit brought by nan Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, alleging that nan litigation was a retaliatory effort because of its reporting connected nan Trump administration.
In a filing successful national tribunal successful Manhattan, nan Times’ ineligible squad wrote, “The Commission revenge this action only 8 days aft The Times published an article reporting that nan EEOC is nether unit to usage its scarce resources to prosecute flimsy (at best) claims of alleged favoritism that ‘fit nan Trump administration’s priorities,’ and a specified 2 days aft The Times reported that it was being investigated by nan EEOC.”
In May, nan EEOC revenge a reverse favoritism suit against nan Times, alleging that it violated national rule erstwhile it passed up a achromatic antheral worker for a promotion because of his title aliases sex.
But successful its filing, nan Times’ ineligible squad wrote that nan personification chosen for nan domiciled arsenic lawman existent property editor was much qualified than nan personification who was passed up for nan job, Bryant Roussau. The Times’ squad wrote that she had extended acquisition pinch work publicity and “articulated a compelling imagination for nan early of The Times’s existent property sum that aligned pinch nan Real Estate desk’s goals to attraction connected work and visually-driven journalism.” The Times besides noted that different candidates of colour of some sexes had much existent property acquisition than Rousseau yet were not precocious successful nan hiring process.
“Despite conducting an eight-month investigation, collecting much than a 1000 pages of documents, and interviewing nary less than 9 witnesses, nan Commission was incapable to place immoderate grounds that The Times considered nan selected candidate’s title aliases activity successful filling nan position,” nan Times stated successful its filing.
The counterclaim besides identifies galore instances successful which Trump has attacked nan Times, noting that he has, among different things, called it “treasonous.”
“The Commission’s retaliatory, bad religion usage of its authority to target The Times violates nan First and Fifth Amendments and nan Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) and poses a uniquely insidious threat to a free and independent press, and to our democracy,” according to nan filing.
The counterclaim alleges usurpation of nan First Amendment, owed process and nan Administrative Procedure Act. It seeks dismissal of nan EEOC declare and a declaration that nan suit was a usurpation of nan First and Fifth Amendment, arsenic good arsenic nan APA. It besides seeks costs and attorney’s fees.
An EEOC spokesperson did not instantly respond to a petition for comment.
