vox--2020-06-17--How the new rules for the Paycheck Protection Program help small-business owners

The Paycheck Protection Program , a loan program designed to help small businesses weather the economic downturn during the pandemic , has some new rules .
These changes — approved by Congress via the Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act earlier this month — are designed to make it easier for business owners to get their loans forgiven and increase the program ’ s utility .
Vox is here to help small-business owners navigate these changes .
Among the updates : Business owners now have more leeway when it comes to spending the loan money .
Previously , recipients were required @ @ @ @ @ @ @ loans for payroll in order to have the full loan forgiven , a limitation that wound up posing a problem for thousands of business owners , who needed a significant chunk of the funds for other costs , like rent and utilities .
This rule was in line with the original goal of the program , which was to help businesses keep employees on payroll : The strict 75 percent cutoff , however , is something that the Small Business Administration ( SBA ) had put in place , not lawmakers .
Additionally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , lawmakers have received significant feedback from small-business owners calling for more flexibility around the loans because they need just as much help with other costs in order to stay afloat .
For smaller businesses especially , their operational costs could be comparable to their payroll expenses .
The new policy lowers the original SBA threshold and would require recipients to use 60 percent of the loan specifically on payroll .
Additionally , it would give business owners more time to spend the loans : Before , the money had to be used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now it can be used within 24 weeks of obtaining it .
There ’ s a lot the new law doesn ’ t fix , including the lack of transparency around the demographics of business owners receiving PPP loans .
But at their core , these changes help small-business owners better address the shortfalls they ’ ve been experiencing as a result of the coronavirus .
Had these updates not been implemented , a report from the Small Business Administration ’ s Inspector General found that the program ’ s limitations , particularly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lead to more recipients taking on debt .
Here ’ s a rundown of what the new law changes Congress passed the Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act earlier this month in response to concerns that many business owners had expressed about restrictions on the loans , and President Donald Trump signed it into law shortly afterward .
“ For months , we have heard from thousands of small businesses that PPP ’ s rigid structure does not meet their needs , and 80 percent of business owners in our network fear that under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ forgiven , ” says John Arensmeyer , the CEO of Small Business Majority , an advocacy group for small businesses .
Concerns about loan forgiveness have likely even contributed to business owners ’ reluctance to apply for PPP support : While the first wave of funding for the program ran out within two weeks , the second tranche of money Congress approved has yet to be used in full .
All updates to the law apply to businesses receiving new PPP loans on or after June 5 ; only some of them apply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support .
Here ’ s a rundown of what the law changes in the program and who benefits : • More time to spend PPP funds : Business owners originally had eight weeks to use PPP money , a time frame that ’ s been expanded to 24 weeks .
The cutoff to spend the funds is now either December 31 , 2020 , or 24 weeks from the receipt of the loan , an update that reflects the enduring nature of the economic downturn , which is expected to last beyond the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change applies to both new and existing PPP loan holders .
• Less restrictive loan forgiveness requirements : Business owners were required to spend 75 percent of their PPP loans on payroll in order for them to be fully forgiven and now they ’ re only required to spend 60 percent of the funds on such costs .
That means that businesses now have the ability to spend more money on other operational needs , including rent .
This change applies to both new and existing PPP loan holders .
• More flexibility @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to rehire “ full-time equivalent ” employees they had laid off by June 30 , 2020 , in order to qualify for full loan forgiveness , according to the original law .
Because many businesses are still not operating at the same levels as before the pandemic , and some employees may not want to resume their old jobs due to health concerns , the deadline for rehiring full-time employees has been changed to December 31 , 2020 .
The law also exempts business owners from having to satisfy the rehiring requirement if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made attempts to fulfill it and been unable to rehire past employees or new employees qualified for the role , or if they ’ re operating at a different level financially due to their adherence to coronavirus-related policies .
This change applies to both new and existing PPP loan holders .
• More time to repay the loans : For business owners who do not have their full loans forgiven , the law extends the amount of time they have to repay these loans .
The original maturity date of the PPP loans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ frame that ’ s now been changed to five years .
This change automatically applies to new PPP recipients who obtained their loans on or after June 5 , but existing PPP loan holders can try to work out an agreement with their lenders as well .
• An additional option for tax deferrals : The bill ensures that business owners who have benefited from PPP loans can defer payroll tax obligations this year .
This change applies to both new and existing PPP loan holders .
In the recent implementation of this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s rule also makes the program more accessible to people who have in the past been convicted of a crime .
The program had originally barred individuals convicted of a criminal felony during the last five years from obtaining a loan , and that time window has now been reduced to one year , depending on the felony .
One of the central problems of the PPP has been the lack of access that many small businesses have faced throughout its implementation , particularly those run by minorities and women .
According to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lending , which was released after the first wave of PPP funding was exhausted , as many as 90 percent of businesses run by minorities and women would potentially be excluded from the program .
As CRL noted in a recent statement , the new PPP fix does not address gaps in data collection about the demographics of borrowers using the program .
Another bill approved by Congress , the Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care Enhancement Act , has attempted to tackle these disparities by allocating more money to community-based financial institutions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of serving business owners of color .
There are still concerns that some of the smallest businesses aren ’ t being fully served by the program , however .
Sens .
Kamala Harris , Cory Booker , and Steve Daines are among those who have proposed legislation that would further target additional funding to smaller businesses , particularly those run by underrepresented groups , including black Americans .
The HEROES Act , a stimulus bill approved in the House , would also address this issue by establishing a carve-out in funds for businesses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senate , however , has stalled the passage of additional stimulus , which it now isn ’ t expected to consider until after lawmakers take a July Fourth recess .
Arensmeyer , the head of Small Business Majority , stressed the urgency of approving more aid for small businesses in the coming months as the economic effects of the pandemic persist .
“ The next phase of assistance must include a bold direct grants program for businesses with under 100 employees and automatic PPP forgiveness for all loans under $ 150,000 , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one-time loan program will be enough is shortsighted and will leave America struggling well beyond 2030.
” Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

The Paycheck Protection Program, a loan program designed to help small businesses weather the economic downturn during the pandemic, has some new rules. These changes — approved by Congress via the Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act earlier this month — are designed to make it easier for business owners to get their loans forgiven and increase the program’s utility.
Vox is here to help small-business owners navigate these changes.
Among the updates: Business owners now have more leeway when it comes to spending the loan money. Previously, recipients were required to use 75 percent of the PPP loans for payroll in order to have the full loan forgiven, a limitation that wound up posing a problem for thousands of business owners, who needed a significant chunk of the funds for other costs, like rent and utilities.
This rule was in line with the original goal of the program, which was to help businesses keep employees on payroll: The strict 75 percent cutoff, however, is something that the Small Business Administration (SBA) had put in place, not lawmakers. Additionally, since the program has taken off, lawmakers have received significant feedback from small-business owners calling for more flexibility around the loans because they need just as much help with other costs in order to stay afloat. For smaller businesses especially, their operational costs could be comparable to their payroll expenses.
The new policy lowers the original SBA threshold and would require recipients to use 60 percent of the loan specifically on payroll. Additionally, it would give business owners more time to spend the loans: Before, the money had to be used within an eight-week time frame, but now it can be used within 24 weeks of obtaining it.
There’s a lot the new law doesn’t fix, including the lack of transparency around the demographics of business owners receiving PPP loans. But at their core, these changes help small-business owners better address the shortfalls they’ve been experiencing as a result of the coronavirus. Had these updates not been implemented, a report from the Small Business Administration’s Inspector General found that the program’s limitations, particularly its rules on loan forgiveness, could lead to more recipients taking on debt.
Here’s a rundown of what the new law changes
Congress passed the Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act earlier this month in response to concerns that many business owners had expressed about restrictions on the loans, and President Donald Trump signed it into law shortly afterward.
“For months, we have heard from thousands of small businesses that PPP’s rigid structure does not meet their needs, and 80 percent of business owners in our network fear that under current rules their loan may not be forgiven,” says John Arensmeyer, the CEO of Small Business Majority, an advocacy group for small businesses.
Concerns about loan forgiveness have likely even contributed to business owners’ reluctance to apply for PPP support: While the first wave of funding for the program ran out within two weeks, the second tranche of money Congress approved has yet to be used in full.
All updates to the law apply to businesses receiving new PPP loans on or after June 5; only some of them apply to those who had already received PPP support. Here’s a rundown of what the law changes in the program and who benefits:
More time to spend PPP funds: Business owners originally had eight weeks to use PPP money, a time frame that’s been expanded to 24 weeks. The cutoff to spend the funds is now either December 31, 2020, or 24 weeks from the receipt of the loan, an update that reflects the enduring nature of the economic downturn, which is expected to last beyond the initial months of the pandemic. This change applies to both new and existing PPP loan holders.
Business owners originally had eight weeks to use PPP money, a time frame that’s been expanded to 24 weeks. The cutoff to spend the funds is now either December 31, 2020, or 24 weeks from the receipt of the loan, an update that reflects the enduring nature of the economic downturn, which is expected to last beyond the initial months of the pandemic. This change applies to both new and existing PPP loan holders. Less restrictive loan forgiveness requirements: Business owners were required to spend 75 percent of their PPP loans on payroll in order for them to be fully forgiven and now they’re only required to spend 60 percent of the funds on such costs. That means that businesses now have the ability to spend more money on other operational needs, including rent. This change applies to both new and existing PPP loan holders.
Business owners were required to spend 75 percent of their PPP loans on payroll in order for them to be fully forgiven and now they’re only required to spend 60 percent of the funds on such costs. That means that businesses now have the ability to spend more money on other operational needs, including rent. This change applies to both new and existing PPP loan holders. More flexibility around rehiring employees: Small businesses had to rehire “full-time equivalent” employees they had laid off by June 30, 2020, in order to qualify for full loan forgiveness, according to the original law. Because many businesses are still not operating at the same levels as before the pandemic, and some employees may not want to resume their old jobs due to health concerns, the deadline for rehiring full-time employees has been changed to December 31, 2020.
The law also exempts business owners from having to satisfy the rehiring requirement if they could demonstrate that they’ve made attempts to fulfill it and been unable to rehire past employees or new employees qualified for the role, or if they’re operating at a different level financially due to their adherence to coronavirus-related policies. This change applies to both new and existing PPP loan holders.
More time to repay the loans: For business owners who do not have their full loans forgiven, the law extends the amount of time they have to repay these loans. The original maturity date of the PPP loans started at two years, a time frame that’s now been changed to five years. This change automatically applies to new PPP recipients who obtained their loans on or after June 5, but existing PPP loan holders can try to work out an agreement with their lenders as well.
For business owners who do not have their full loans forgiven, the law extends the amount of time they have to repay these loans. The original maturity date of the PPP loans started at two years, a time frame that’s now been changed to five years. This change automatically applies to new PPP recipients who obtained their loans on or after June 5, but existing PPP loan holders can try to work out an agreement with their lenders as well. An additional option for tax deferrals: The bill ensures that business owners who have benefited from PPP loans can defer payroll tax obligations this year. This change applies to both new and existing PPP loan holders.
In the recent implementation of this legislation, the Small Business Administration’s rule also makes the program more accessible to people who have in the past been convicted of a crime. The program had originally barred individuals convicted of a criminal felony during the last five years from obtaining a loan, and that time window has now been reduced to one year, depending on the felony.
There’s a lot the law doesn’t fix
One of the central problems of the PPP has been the lack of access that many small businesses have faced throughout its implementation, particularly those run by minorities and women.
According to an estimate from the Center for Responsible Lending, which was released after the first wave of PPP funding was exhausted, as many as 90 percent of businesses run by minorities and women would potentially be excluded from the program. As CRL noted in a recent statement, the new PPP fix does not address gaps in data collection about the demographics of borrowers using the program.
Another bill approved by Congress, the Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care Enhancement Act, has attempted to tackle these disparities by allocating more money to community-based financial institutions, which have a better track record of serving business owners of color.
There are still concerns that some of the smallest businesses aren’t being fully served by the program, however. Sens. Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, and Steve Daines are among those who have proposed legislation that would further target additional funding to smaller businesses, particularly those run by underrepresented groups, including black Americans.
The HEROES Act, a stimulus bill approved in the House, would also address this issue by establishing a carve-out in funds for businesses with 10 employees or fewer. The Senate, however, has stalled the passage of additional stimulus, which it now isn’t expected to consider until after lawmakers take a July Fourth recess.
Arensmeyer, the head of Small Business Majority, stressed the urgency of approving more aid for small businesses in the coming months as the economic effects of the pandemic persist.
“The next phase of assistance must include a bold direct grants program for businesses with under 100 employees and automatic PPP forgiveness for all loans under $150,000,” he emphasizes. “Simply thinking a one-time loan program will be enough is shortsighted and will leave America struggling well beyond 2030.”


vox--2020-06-17--Aunt Jemima and the long-overdue rebrand of racist stereotypes

For years , the smiling image of Aunt Jemima — found on pancake mix , syrup bottles , and breakfast food boxes nationwide — has courted controversy for its racist history .
The icon has undergone slight visual changes over time , but the brand ’ s name has stuck for more than a century , dating back to 1889 .
On June 17 , Quaker Oats , the subsidiary of PepsiCo that produces Aunt Jemima products , acknowledged that the brand ’ s origins are based on a racial stereotype and announced it will work to make packaging and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ As we work to make progress toward racial equality through several initiatives , we also must take a hard look at our portfolio of brands and ensure they reflect our values and meet our consumers ’ expectations , ” wrote Kristin Kroepfl , vice president and chief marketing officer of Quaker Foods North America , in a press release .
Kroepfl noted that the brand has been updated over the years “ to be appropriate and respectful , ” but that the company realizes those changes are insufficient .
The nationwide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ racism has prompted many companies , from media corporations to technology platforms , to not only reassess work culture but reckon with past contributions to or complicity in racial injustice .
Acknowledging and weeding out racist symbols in American culture is a project that ’ s being undertaken on several levels : Many are calling for the removal of Confederate statues and the renaming of buildings that honor slave traders or imperialists , and restaurants and foodstuffs with a problematic history are also edging toward a rebrand .
Since its acquisition of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Oats has spent decades obscuring the roots of Aunt Jemima , hiring black actresses to portray an innocuous , domestic character who is dedicated to serving delicious pancakes .
In modern times , it has explicitly focused its messaging toward nourishment and motherhood , rather than the Aunt Jemima figure herself .
The most familiar iteration of Aunt Jemima is from her 1989 contemporary rebrand , in which she was given pearl earrings and a lace collar ( visual cues of an elevated class status ) .
Still , nothing was done about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ familiarity and recognition is an invaluable asset , ’ ’ a Quaker Oats spokesperson told the Chicago Tribune in 1989 .
Despite this wholesome-sounding message , the Aunt Jemima figure is rooted in Jim Crow-era perceptions of black women , specifically the Southern “ mammy ” stereotype of a loyal and submissive servant .
As Riché Richardson , an associate professor of African American literature at Cornell University , wrote in the New York Times in 2015 , the icon is “ an outgrowth of Old South plantation nostalgia , ” which visually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plump black woman wearing a headscarf.
” ( Her headscarf was turned into a headband in 1968 . )
The name “ Aunt Jemima ” is derived from the minstrel song “ Old Aunt Jemima ” by Billy Kersands , a popular black comedian in the late 19th century .
In her book Black Hunger : Soul Food and America , researcher Doris Witt explored the various pop culture narratives that emerged around Aunt Jemima , which legitimized her as a brand and familiar trope to a white audience that bought into these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Aunt Jemima iconography , Witt theorized , was “ inextricably linked to the material production and consumption of Aunt Jemima pancake mix in a rapidly expanding commodity system , ” one that relied on exploitable labor to be profitable .
It ’ s also unclear whether the black women who were hired to portray Aunt Jemima over the decades were properly compensated for their work .
Descendants of Nancy Green and Anna S. Harrington — women who were selected by owners of the Aunt Jemima brand to develop the character — sued Quaker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ damages , claiming that the women lent their likeness to the brand and even helped develop the pancake mix recipe .
( PepsiCo did not find any formal contracts between Harrington , Green , or any other black women who professionally embodied Aunt Jemima , Smithsonian Magazine reported in 2014 . )
Caught during a fraught cultural moment , American companies like Quaker Oats are recognizing the need to confront their brands ’ histories and evolve them to suit society ’ s needs .
Within hours of Quaker Oats ’ announcement , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s , which is owned by Mars Inc. , told HuffPost that the company will consider “ evolving ” Uncle Ben ’ s visual brand identity and acknowledged its corporate responsibility to “ put an end to racial bias and injustices.
” Cream of Wheat cereal , a brand that dates back to 1893 , also features a smiling black chef as its logo .
Critics say these male figures draw from the “ Uncle Tom ” stereotype popular in the post-Reconstruction period , in which black men are depicted as obedient @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their validation .
Ultimately , this is a cultural decision as much as a business one .
Despite the longstanding familiarity of Aunt Jemima , Quaker Oats is admitting that the name is reflective of outdated , regressive beliefs of black women .
Regardless , why did it take so long for a breakfast food company to concede that its iconography is racist ?
Perhaps now , Quaker Oats — and similar corporations overseeing brands like Uncle Ben ’ s and Cream of Wheat — is finally realizing that remaining silent on Aunt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ line , especially after its parent company PepsiCo pledged a $ 5 million donation to uplift black Americans .
Sign up for The Goods ’ newsletter .
Twice a week , we ’ ll send you the best Goods stories exploring what we buy , why we buy it , and why it matters .
Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

For years, the smiling image of Aunt Jemima — found on pancake mix, syrup bottles, and breakfast food boxes nationwide — has courted controversy for its racist history. The icon has undergone slight visual changes over time, but the brand’s name has stuck for more than a century, dating back to 1889.
On June 17, Quaker Oats, the subsidiary of PepsiCo that produces Aunt Jemima products, acknowledged that the brand’s origins are based on a racial stereotype and announced it will work to make packaging and name changes toward the end of 2020.
“As we work to make progress toward racial equality through several initiatives, we also must take a hard look at our portfolio of brands and ensure they reflect our values and meet our consumers’ expectations,” wrote Kristin Kroepfl, vice president and chief marketing officer of Quaker Foods North America, in a press release. Kroepfl noted that the brand has been updated over the years “to be appropriate and respectful,” but that the company realizes those changes are insufficient.
The nationwide wave of protests against police brutality and racism has prompted many companies, from media corporations to technology platforms, to not only reassess work culture but reckon with past contributions to or complicity in racial injustice. Acknowledging and weeding out racist symbols in American culture is a project that’s being undertaken on several levels: Many are calling for the removal of Confederate statues and the renaming of buildings that honor slave traders or imperialists, and restaurants and foodstuffs with a problematic history are also edging toward a rebrand.
Since its acquisition of the Aunt Jemima brand in 1926, Quaker Oats has spent decades obscuring the roots of Aunt Jemima, hiring black actresses to portray an innocuous, domestic character who is dedicated to serving delicious pancakes. In modern times, it has explicitly focused its messaging toward nourishment and motherhood, rather than the Aunt Jemima figure herself. The most familiar iteration of Aunt Jemima is from her 1989 contemporary rebrand, in which she was given pearl earrings and a lace collar (visual cues of an elevated class status). Still, nothing was done about her name. “That kind of familiarity and recognition is an invaluable asset,’’ a Quaker Oats spokesperson told the Chicago Tribune in 1989.
Despite this wholesome-sounding message, the Aunt Jemima figure is rooted in Jim Crow-era perceptions of black women, specifically the Southern “mammy” stereotype of a loyal and submissive servant. As Riché Richardson, an associate professor of African American literature at Cornell University, wrote in the New York Times in 2015, the icon is “an outgrowth of Old South plantation nostalgia,” which visually portrayed her “as an asexual, plump black woman wearing a headscarf.” (Her headscarf was turned into a headband in 1968.)
The name “Aunt Jemima” is derived from the minstrel song “Old Aunt Jemima” by Billy Kersands, a popular black comedian in the late 19th century. In her book Black Hunger: Soul Food and America, researcher Doris Witt explored the various pop culture narratives that emerged around Aunt Jemima, which legitimized her as a brand and familiar trope to a white audience that bought into these products. The production and consumption of Aunt Jemima iconography, Witt theorized, was “inextricably linked to the material production and consumption of Aunt Jemima pancake mix in a rapidly expanding commodity system,” one that relied on exploitable labor to be profitable.
It’s also unclear whether the black women who were hired to portray Aunt Jemima over the decades were properly compensated for their work. Descendants of Nancy Green and Anna S. Harrington — women who were selected by owners of the Aunt Jemima brand to develop the character — sued Quaker Oats in 2014 for unpaid royalties and damages, claiming that the women lent their likeness to the brand and even helped develop the pancake mix recipe. (PepsiCo did not find any formal contracts between Harrington, Green, or any other black women who professionally embodied Aunt Jemima, Smithsonian Magazine reported in 2014.)
Caught during a fraught cultural moment, American companies like Quaker Oats are recognizing the need to confront their brands’ histories and evolve them to suit society’s needs. Within hours of Quaker Oats’ announcement, a spokesperson for the rice brand Uncle Ben’s, which is owned by Mars Inc., told HuffPost that the company will consider “evolving” Uncle Ben’s visual brand identity and acknowledged its corporate responsibility to “put an end to racial bias and injustices.” Cream of Wheat cereal, a brand that dates back to 1893, also features a smiling black chef as its logo. Critics say these male figures draw from the “Uncle Tom” stereotype popular in the post-Reconstruction period, in which black men are depicted as obedient and subservient to white people and crave their validation.
Ultimately, this is a cultural decision as much as a business one. Despite the longstanding familiarity of Aunt Jemima, Quaker Oats is admitting that the name is reflective of outdated, regressive beliefs of black women. Regardless, why did it take so long for a breakfast food company to concede that its iconography is racist? Perhaps now, Quaker Oats — and similar corporations overseeing brands like Uncle Ben’s and Cream of Wheat — is finally realizing that remaining silent on Aunt Jemima will no longer serve its bottom line, especially after its parent company PepsiCo pledged a $5 million donation to uplift black Americans.
Sign up for The Goods’ newsletter. Twice a week, we’ll send you the best Goods stories exploring what we buy, why we buy it, and why it matters.


vox--2020-06-18--Companies bringing in new leaders to help with race might also be setting them up to fail

Corporate America is scrambling to walk the walk on racial justice , and the people companies enlist to help them do it might face a rough path ahead .
We ’ re in the midst of a reckoning on systemic racism in America , and the conversation is playing out at high-profile levels in the corporate world .
In media , outlets such as Bon Appétit , Refinery29 , and the New York Times have seen major leadership departures amid racial strife .
The CEOs of CrossFit , the Wing , and Reformation have exited .
And industry to industry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and doesn ’ t hold power is under examination .
Many companies are promising to do better .
They say they ’ re aware that black people and people of color are woefully underrepresented in their ranks and often especially at the top levels .
And in the months and weeks to come , we ’ re likely to see companies start to make new hires and build out their diversity and inclusion efforts in the name of waking up on race .
The shoes of more than one white executive , editor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ filled by a black leader .
Of course that ’ s a good thing — right now , I can literally count the number of black Fortune 500 CEOs on one hand .
But there ’ s no denying that the people who will be asked to take on those roles aren ’ t walking into the rosiest of situations .
Their predecessors are leaving a mess behind them , one they ’ ll be asked to clean up .
And it ’ s not just a mess on race .
We ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a pandemic and a major economic downturn .
“ The issue is you ’ re not only bringing in this person to fix the firm , but they ’ re not operating from baseline , ” said Chanda Daniels , co-founder of the Reclaim , an intersectional women ’ s rights and gender equity organization .
“ They have so much work to do [ on fixing office culture ] than their predecessor ever had to do .
And on top of that , they have to outperform their predecessor to justify them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these people will find themselves on the “ glass cliff , ” a phenomenon experienced by women and minorities where they ’ re elevated to positions of power when things are going poorly .
If they succeed , the reward is high .
Problem is , the risk of failure is unusually high , too .
“ You ’ re way up where everybody can see you , so you ’ ve been elevated to a really important position , but it ’ s incredibly precarious , because you ’ re standing on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said Lex Washington , who studies gender , diversity , and bias at work at Oklahoma State University .
“ Usually , the level of risk we ’ re talking about is such that unless things turn around , there will be an immediate or large-scale consequence.
” On the glass cliff and risking a fall In early June , Alexis Ohanian , the founder and former CEO of Reddit , announced he would step down from the internet forum ’ s board and was encouraging the company to replace him with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can actually be an act of leadership from people in power right now , ” he said at the time .
Reddit has since named Michael Seibel , the black CEO of startup accelerator Y Combinator , as Ohanian ’ s replacement .
A company acting on diversity is a lot better than talking about how it ’ s important , but it ’ s not a cure-all The maneuver is meaningful — a company acting on diversity is a lot better than talking about how it ’ s important — but it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been plagued with racist vitriol since its inception and saw its former CEO , Ellen Pao , viciously harassed by its users .
As Kaitlyn Tiffany at the Atlantic outlines , CEO Steve Huffman ’ s recent letter to employees declaring “ Black Lives Matter ” was met with an open letter signed by millions of subscribers calling on Huffman and the board to take more meaningful action on the racist content it hosts .
To be sure , Seibel isn ’ t being tasked with solving all of Reddit ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ board , not CEO .
And he ’ s got his own accelerator to run .
It ’ s an inexact example of the glass cliff phenomenon , but it shows the point .
Seibel is coming in to help solve a problem in a less-than-ideal situation — a situation Ohanian is walking away from .
To back up a bit , most people have heard of the “ glass ceiling , ” a metaphor for the invisible barrier that keeps women from achieving the highest positions in business and politics .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — the person ’ s made it up there , but they ’ re highly visible and looking down , and the glass could shatter and they could fall off the cliff at any moment .
The term was coined by two researchers at the University of Exeter in 2005 .
They looked at the 100 companies listed on the London Stock Exchange that make up the FTSE 100 index to see what the circumstances were as men and women were brought onto their boards .
They discovered that in times of stock @ @ @ @ @ @ @ onto their boards were likelier to have experienced a bad performance in the preceding five months than those that brought on men .
Later , researchers at Utah State University followed up , taking a look at Fortune 500 company CEO trends over 15 years , and had similar findings .
Basically , women and people of color are likelier than white men to be promoted as chief executive at companies that are doing poorly .
“ When firms are doing poorly , the really qualified white male candidates say , ‘ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this , ’ ” Allison Cook , one of the Utah State researchers , told me in an interview in 2018 .
“ Women and minorities might feel like this might be their only shot , so they need to go ahead and take it.
” The research on the glass cliff , especially when it comes to people of color , isn ’ t extensive , in large part because there are so few examples of them reaching the upper echelons of corporate America .
Right now , there are only five @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And there has only ever been one black woman Fortune 500 CEO — Ursula Burns at Xerox , who stepped down in 2016 .
( Mary Winston served as Bed Bath & Beyond ’ s interim CEO , but she didn ’ t get the permanent spot . )
Researchers also point to sports as an example that the glass cliff exists for people of color .
A study of NCAA Division I basketball coaches from 1979 to 2009 found that minority coaches were more likely to be hired by a team with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spot for a year less than their white counterparts in the position .
In other words , they were brought into already precarious situations , and they were given a shorter time frame to succeed .
A lot of people are willing and excited to take on the risk — it ’ s an opportunity to prove themselves and to gain visibility .
People of color are often very visible because of their identities ( they ’ re the only person of color in the room ) , but they ’ re overlooked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ executive who can come in and prove himself or herself … if you can do your job then , you will have earned your stripes , ” said Soledad O ’ Brien , a longtime broadcaster and producer .
But if they fail — and because they ’ re often walking into uncertain situations , it ’ s very possible — it can be detrimental in the long term .
“ The glass cliff phenomenon might actually perpetuate underrepresentation in the long run .
If minority leaders are more likely to become leaders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their chances of failure are significantly higher than normal , ” said Desmond Leung , who researches industrial organization psychology at the City University of New York .
“ And if they do fail , this may perpetuate stereotypes that minorities aren ’ t well-suited for leadership.
” “ Am I expecting this black woman to come in and change everything just because she is a black woman ?
” Many companies examining their workforces , C-suites , and boardrooms right now are making an unsurprising discovery : It ’ s all very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ declaring Black Lives Matter on Instagram and calling it a day isn ’ t a sufficient fix .
Their customers , their workers , and much of the American public want better .
So they ’ re scrambling to make changes , and make them fast .
Paying attention to and taking action on diversity is important .
But what ’ s also important is how it ’ s done .
Rebecca Carroll , a writer and host at WNYC , has been outspoken about the obstacles she ’ s encountered in her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
She has recounted many times her experiences at various outlets where she was undermined , underappreciated , and overlooked .
“ You can ’ t just give up your position on a board and hire a black woman in a role where a white man was , because the rules are different ” I spoke with her about what she makes of the current moment , and what it will look like if more black leaders are brought into the fold to clean up after their white predecessors .
She emphasized her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into positions created for white people , when some of those positions need to be rethought entirely .
“ You can ’ t just give up your position on a board and hire a black woman in a role where a white man was , because the rules are different .
The way that black woman then has to embody the space , there ’ s no room for her to be who she is and how she might be the chairman of the board or a vice president or a manager , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s one of the things that ’ s very rarely addressed .
It ’ s not just the hire , it ’ s not just changing the culture , it ’ s also rewriting and reimagining these positions that are being filled.
” Companies risk tokenism — pulling in one or a handful of people of color to put on a better face , say , “ Look at us and how we ’ re doing better , ” and calling it a day .
But if they want to succeed , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the support they need to succeed and provide clear metrics of what that success looks like .
“ Am I expecting this black woman to come in and change everything just because she is a black woman ?
If the answer is yes , that ’ s not being set up for success , ” said Y-Vonne Hutchinson , chief executive and founder of ReadySet , a diversity consulting firm .
As corporations bring in black workers and leaders to help set their new agendas , experts say it ’ s important for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they need and how it will be provided to them .
Washington , who in 2018 interviewed nearly 60 black female executives about the intersectional invisibility they experienced at work , said they were intentional about coming in with a plan and being candid about their needs in negotiations before taking on high-risk positions .
If they were asked to help turn things around , fine , but what does a turnaround look like ?
And when that happens , what ’ s next ?
What does the job look like at a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down to intentionality .
All of these places have been talking a good game , and they haven ’ t really been doing the work to bring in diverse people , ” O ’ Brien said .
Once new people are in the spot , it ’ s vital that they ’ re listened to .
“ White folks in a position of power really do have to practice deference , and that ’ s something that has to come into play for any of these racial reckoning moments to have any staying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be a level of deference that happens , ” Carroll said .
It ’ s also worth noting that the work is exhausting .
And again , right now , black leaders aren ’ t just stepping in at companies with racial strife .
They ’ ll also have to make tough decisions about how to respond to the ongoing pandemic and what to do about the economic conditions it has created .
This will likely force some tough decisions in terms of where to spend .
“ It takes a toll on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Washington said .
“ The current racism pandemic that we ’ re facing and the crisis that that creates in American workplaces is a different kind of crisis , and it ’ s one that implicates race and gender and makes it the center of the crisis .
The people who take on those leadership roles , if they belong to those groups , do take quite a lot of emotional toll , and a lot of toll on the workplace as well.
” She added that the stereotypes they have long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ either .
There ’ s an opportunity here that shouldn ’ t be wasted Of all the moments for corporate America to have its big racial reckoning , this may not be the ideal one .
( To be clear , it should have come earlier , not later . )
If anything , a lot of companies are looking to make cuts right now , not expand .
And as they bring in new leadership to try to address toxic cultures , in many cases , they ’ ll also have to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ afloat .
It ’ s not clear who ’ s going to take over for the Wing CEO Audrey Gelman , but whoever it is will have to try to tackle keeping a coworking space in business when nobody wants to be in the same room with strangers .
And beyond corporations , look at politics .
Joe Biden is under pressure to choose a black woman as his running mate .
If he does , she will be tasked with taking on all the normal running-mate tasks , plus doing it in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all while being the campaign ’ s ( and the entire Democratic Party ’ s ) likely top surrogate on race .
Many of the people I spoke with for this story acknowledged some big challenges ahead , but they also noted it ’ s a big opportunity , and if something will ever change , it ’ s now .
“ If there is ever a moment for revolutionary change , that moment is now ” Hutchinson , who runs a diversity consulting firm , said that at the start of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ making were to human resources and , ultimately , their diversity and inclusion programs .
Now that ’ s reversed course .
It ’ s not clear whether the momentum will last , but it could .
“ If there is ever a moment for revolutionary change , that moment is now .
That doesn ’ t necessarily mean that change is going to happen , but if that change were going to happen , it ’ s going to happen now , ” she said .
O ’ Brien , who runs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ Brien Productions , struck an even more optimistic tone .
“ I never think of it as a negative that you ’ re walking into a broken situation in a pandemic , because honestly , when you ’ re a leader , you like opportunities to lead , ” she said .
There ’ s a difference between waking up on race performatively versus in reality .
Plenty of firms interview a “ diverse slate ” of candidates , only to wind up hiring the white candidate they had already pegged for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like you ’ re sourcing from people from different backgrounds , races , ethnicities , and genders doesn ’ t cut it .
You want to know whether you ’ re interviewing too many white guys ?
You can count them .
The same goes for the boardroom , the executive suite , and the worker roster .
“ If it matters to you , measure it , ” O ’ Brien said .
“ If you don ’ t care , stop talking about caring.
” Every day at Vox , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

Corporate America is scrambling to walk the walk on racial justice, and the people companies enlist to help them do it might face a rough path ahead.
We’re in the midst of a reckoning on systemic racism in America, and the conversation is playing out at high-profile levels in the corporate world. In media, outlets such as Bon Appétit, Refinery29, and the New York Times have seen major leadership departures amid racial strife. The CEOs of CrossFit, the Wing, and Reformation have exited. And industry to industry, company to company, who does and doesn’t hold power is under examination.
Many companies are promising to do better. They say they’re aware that black people and people of color are woefully underrepresented in their ranks and often especially at the top levels. And in the months and weeks to come, we’re likely to see companies start to make new hires and build out their diversity and inclusion efforts in the name of waking up on race. The shoes of more than one white executive, editor, or founder are likely to be filled by a black leader.
Of course that’s a good thing — right now, I can literally count the number of black Fortune 500 CEOs on one hand. But there’s no denying that the people who will be asked to take on those roles aren’t walking into the rosiest of situations. Their predecessors are leaving a mess behind them, one they’ll be asked to clean up. And it’s not just a mess on race. We’re also still in the midst of a pandemic and a major economic downturn.
i keep thinking about how these ceos/founders/chiefs made so much money, generated so much trauma, and are now leaving behind extraordinarily huge messes for someone else to deal with — Jenna Wortham (@jennydeluxe) June 11, 2020
“The issue is you’re not only bringing in this person to fix the firm, but they’re not operating from baseline,” said Chanda Daniels, co-founder of the Reclaim, an intersectional women’s rights and gender equity organization. “They have so much work to do [on fixing office culture] than their predecessor ever had to do. And on top of that, they have to outperform their predecessor to justify them being in the position.”
Many of these people will find themselves on the “glass cliff,” a phenomenon experienced by women and minorities where they’re elevated to positions of power when things are going poorly. If they succeed, the reward is high. Problem is, the risk of failure is unusually high, too.
“You’re way up where everybody can see you, so you’ve been elevated to a really important position, but it’s incredibly precarious, because you’re standing on a cliff made of glass,” said Lex Washington, who studies gender, diversity, and bias at work at Oklahoma State University. “Usually, the level of risk we’re talking about is such that unless things turn around, there will be an immediate or large-scale consequence.”
On the glass cliff and risking a fall
In early June, Alexis Ohanian, the founder and former CEO of Reddit, announced he would step down from the internet forum’s board and was encouraging the company to replace him with a black candidate. “I believe resignation can actually be an act of leadership from people in power right now,” he said at the time. Reddit has since named Michael Seibel, the black CEO of startup accelerator Y Combinator, as Ohanian’s replacement.
A company acting on diversity is a lot better than talking about how it’s important, but it’s not a cure-all
The maneuver is meaningful — a company acting on diversity is a lot better than talking about how it’s important — but it’s not a cure-all.
Reddit has been plagued with racist vitriol since its inception and saw its former CEO, Ellen Pao, viciously harassed by its users. As Kaitlyn Tiffany at the Atlantic outlines, CEO Steve Huffman’s recent letter to employees declaring “Black Lives Matter” was met with an open letter signed by millions of subscribers calling on Huffman and the board to take more meaningful action on the racist content it hosts. To be sure, Seibel isn’t being tasked with solving all of Reddit’s problems — he’s on the board, not CEO. And he’s got his own accelerator to run.
It’s an inexact example of the glass cliff phenomenon, but it shows the point. Seibel is coming in to help solve a problem in a less-than-ideal situation — a situation Ohanian is walking away from.
To back up a bit, most people have heard of the “glass ceiling,” a metaphor for the invisible barrier that keeps women from achieving the highest positions in business and politics. The glass cliff is a play on that — the person’s made it up there, but they’re highly visible and looking down, and the glass could shatter and they could fall off the cliff at any moment.
The term was coined by two researchers at the University of Exeter in 2005. They looked at the 100 companies listed on the London Stock Exchange that make up the FTSE 100 index to see what the circumstances were as men and women were brought onto their boards. They discovered that in times of stock market decline, firms that brought women onto their boards were likelier to have experienced a bad performance in the preceding five months than those that brought on men.
Later, researchers at Utah State University followed up, taking a look at Fortune 500 company CEO trends over 15 years, and had similar findings. Basically, women and people of color are likelier than white men to be promoted as chief executive at companies that are doing poorly.
“When firms are doing poorly, the really qualified white male candidates say, ‘I don’t want to step into this,’” Allison Cook, one of the Utah State researchers, told me in an interview in 2018. “Women and minorities might feel like this might be their only shot, so they need to go ahead and take it.”
The research on the glass cliff, especially when it comes to people of color, isn’t extensive, in large part because there are so few examples of them reaching the upper echelons of corporate America. Right now, there are only five black CEOs in the Fortune 500. And there has only ever been one black woman Fortune 500 CEO — Ursula Burns at Xerox, who stepped down in 2016. (Mary Winston served as Bed Bath & Beyond’s interim CEO, but she didn’t get the permanent spot.)
Researchers also point to sports as an example that the glass cliff exists for people of color. A study of NCAA Division I basketball coaches from 1979 to 2009 found that minority coaches were more likely to be hired by a team with a losing record and last in the spot for a year less than their white counterparts in the position. In other words, they were brought into already precarious situations, and they were given a shorter time frame to succeed.
A lot of people are willing and excited to take on the risk — it’s an opportunity to prove themselves and to gain visibility. People of color are often very visible because of their identities (they’re the only person of color in the room), but they’re overlooked for their professional skills.
“An executive who can come in and prove himself or herself … if you can do your job then, you will have earned your stripes,” said Soledad O’Brien, a longtime broadcaster and producer.
But if they fail — and because they’re often walking into uncertain situations, it’s very possible — it can be detrimental in the long term. “The glass cliff phenomenon might actually perpetuate underrepresentation in the long run. If minority leaders are more likely to become leaders of organizations that are failing, then their chances of failure are significantly higher than normal,” said Desmond Leung, who researches industrial organization psychology at the City University of New York. “And if they do fail, this may perpetuate stereotypes that minorities aren’t well-suited for leadership.”
“Am I expecting this black woman to come in and change everything just because she is a black woman?”
Many companies examining their workforces, C-suites, and boardrooms right now are making an unsurprising discovery: It’s all very white. And posting a black box declaring Black Lives Matter on Instagram and calling it a day isn’t a sufficient fix. Their customers, their workers, and much of the American public want better. So they’re scrambling to make changes, and make them fast.
Paying attention to and taking action on diversity is important. But what’s also important is how it’s done.
Rebecca Carroll, a writer and host at WNYC, has been outspoken about the obstacles she’s encountered in her decades in journalism as a black woman. She has recounted many times her experiences at various outlets where she was undermined, underappreciated, and overlooked.
“You can’t just give up your position on a board and hire a black woman in a role where a white man was, because the rules are different”
I spoke with her about what she makes of the current moment, and what it will look like if more black leaders are brought into the fold to clean up after their white predecessors. She emphasized her concerns that black people will be brought into positions created for white people, when some of those positions need to be rethought entirely.
“You can’t just give up your position on a board and hire a black woman in a role where a white man was, because the rules are different. The way that black woman then has to embody the space, there’s no room for her to be who she is and how she might be the chairman of the board or a vice president or a manager,” she said. “That’s one of the things that’s very rarely addressed. It’s not just the hire, it’s not just changing the culture, it’s also rewriting and reimagining these positions that are being filled.”
Companies risk tokenism — pulling in one or a handful of people of color to put on a better face, say, “Look at us and how we’re doing better,” and calling it a day. But if they want to succeed, they need to give whoever they bring in the support they need to succeed and provide clear metrics of what that success looks like.
“Am I expecting this black woman to come in and change everything just because she is a black woman? If the answer is yes, that’s not being set up for success,” said Y-Vonne Hutchinson, chief executive and founder of ReadySet, a diversity consulting firm.
As corporations bring in black workers and leaders to help set their new agendas, experts say it’s important for those leaders to be clear about what they need and how it will be provided to them. Washington, who in 2018 interviewed nearly 60 black female executives about the intersectional invisibility they experienced at work, said they were intentional about coming in with a plan and being candid about their needs in negotiations before taking on high-risk positions. If they were asked to help turn things around, fine, but what does a turnaround look like? And when that happens, what’s next? What does the job look like at a normal pace?
“It really comes down to intentionality. All of these places have been talking a good game, and they haven’t really been doing the work to bring in diverse people,” O’Brien said.
Once new people are in the spot, it’s vital that they’re listened to. “White folks in a position of power really do have to practice deference, and that’s something that has to come into play for any of these racial reckoning moments to have any staying power, is that there has to be a level of deference that happens,” Carroll said.
It’s also worth noting that the work is exhausting. And again, right now, black leaders aren’t just stepping in at companies with racial strife. They’ll also have to make tough decisions about how to respond to the ongoing pandemic and what to do about the economic conditions it has created. This will likely force some tough decisions in terms of where to spend.
“It takes a toll on people when they take these positions,” Washington said. “The current racism pandemic that we’re facing and the crisis that that creates in American workplaces is a different kind of crisis, and it’s one that implicates race and gender and makes it the center of the crisis. The people who take on those leadership roles, if they belong to those groups, do take quite a lot of emotional toll, and a lot of toll on the workplace as well.”
She added that the stereotypes they have long faced don’t go away, either.
There’s an opportunity here that shouldn’t be wasted
Of all the moments for corporate America to have its big racial reckoning, this may not be the ideal one. (To be clear, it should have come earlier, not later.) If anything, a lot of companies are looking to make cuts right now, not expand. And as they bring in new leadership to try to address toxic cultures, in many cases, they’ll also have to figure out how to keep the companies afloat.
It’s not clear who’s going to take over for the Wing CEO Audrey Gelman, but whoever it is will have to try to tackle keeping a coworking space in business when nobody wants to be in the same room with strangers. And beyond corporations, look at politics. Joe Biden is under pressure to choose a black woman as his running mate. If he does, she will be tasked with taking on all the normal running-mate tasks, plus doing it in a crisis situation in the country, all while being the campaign’s (and the entire Democratic Party’s) likely top surrogate on race.
Many of the people I spoke with for this story acknowledged some big challenges ahead, but they also noted it’s a big opportunity, and if something will ever change, it’s now.
“If there is ever a moment for revolutionary change, that moment is now”
Hutchinson, who runs a diversity consulting firm, said that at the start of the coronavirus crisis, many cuts companies were making were to human resources and, ultimately, their diversity and inclusion programs. Now that’s reversed course. It’s not clear whether the momentum will last, but it could. “If there is ever a moment for revolutionary change, that moment is now. That doesn’t necessarily mean that change is going to happen, but if that change were going to happen, it’s going to happen now,” she said.
O’Brien, who runs her own media company, Soledad O’Brien Productions, struck an even more optimistic tone. “I never think of it as a negative that you’re walking into a broken situation in a pandemic, because honestly, when you’re a leader, you like opportunities to lead,” she said.
There’s a difference between waking up on race performatively versus in reality. Plenty of firms interview a “diverse slate” of candidates, only to wind up hiring the white candidate they had already pegged for the job. In news, feeling like you’re sourcing from people from different backgrounds, races, ethnicities, and genders doesn’t cut it. You want to know whether you’re interviewing too many white guys? You can count them. The same goes for the boardroom, the executive suite, and the worker roster.
“If it matters to you, measure it,” O’Brien said. “If you don’t care, stop talking about caring.”


vox--2020-06-18--LGBTQ immigrants are waiting on another possibly life-changing decision from the Supreme Court

For José Alonso Muñoz , the prospect of coming out as queer to his friends wasn ’ t nearly as difficult as coming out as an unauthorized immigrant .
A so-called “ DREAMer ” who arrived in the US as a child , he was told to conceal his immigration status for fear of facing deportation , and that fear stayed with him into adulthood until he felt he couldn ’ t be silent any longer .
“ When Trump was elected , it was a pivotal moment for a lot of people , ” he said .
“ For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be able to share my story and to be able to tell the stories of other people , specifically LGBTQ folks.
” This Supreme Court term is especially pivotal for DREAMers like Muñoz who are gay , lesbian , bisexual , transgender , or queer .
On Monday , the justices issued a landmark decision in Bostock v. Clayton County , finding that federal law prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity , a hard-won victory for activists .
Still forthcoming is a decision on the fate of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DACA ) program , which has allowed almost 670,000 unauthorized immigrants known as DREAMers who arrived in the US when they were children to continue to live and work in the country without fear of deportation .
President Donald Trump tried to terminate the program , barring new applications from tens of thousands of other immigrants who would be eligible until legal challenges are resolved .
For LGBTQ DREAMers , Monday ’ s decision marked a moment to celebrate and mobilize .
It gave them hope that the public will rally behind them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allows Trump to move forward with ending DACA , making them eventually vulnerable to deportation .
But for some , it was also a reminder that the fight for their rights hasn ’ t ended yet — at the Supreme Court , in public policy , and in LGBTQ communities where people of color have not always felt welcome .
Vox spoke to three LGBTQ DACA recipients about what it was like to grow up as unauthorized immigrants in the US , what the Supreme Court ’ s decision in Bostock means to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an adverse ruling in the DACA case .
José Alonso Muñoz came to the US from Mexico when he was 3 months old and received DACA status in 2013 , when he was 22 .
He ’ s now the national communications manager for United We Dream , an organization that advocates for DREAMers , and lives in Washington , DC .
He identifies as queer .
What life was like before DACA : I had to pay out of pocket for college .
I was able to get a couple of scholarships @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aid for undocumented students wasn ’ t around at the time .
And so it was actually really hard to go to school because it was just too expensive .
I went to school on and off — I would go for a year and then I would have to take a year off because I couldn ’ t afford to go back , and I worked in a restaurant to save money .
When DACA came around , it allowed me to go back and finish school .
Why he previously avoided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I came out to a lot of my friends when I was maybe 19 or 20 .
I actually was a lot more open about being queer than I was about being undocumented .
Growing up , there were a lot of conversations that I had with my parents about what it meant to be undocumented — that I could be deported — when I was really young , maybe like 9 or 10 .
I think that was very pervasive even into adulthood , which made it harder for me .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who was undocumented outside of my family until my senior year of high school .
What the Supreme Court ’ s decision in Bostock means to him : I had been following it and the death of Aimee Stephens back in May .
She was clearly such a trailblazer , and I think for me , it ’ s just a reminder of how , as LGBTQ people in the United States , our fight has been really led by trans people .
It ’ s important to be able to celebrate this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that , for trans folks , specifically black trans people , there ’ s still so much work that needs to be done to ensure that everyone is able to live and thrive without fear .
It ’ s such a great reminder that so many of us have such intersecting identities .
LGBTQ people are undocumented .
Black folks are DACA recipients .
What will happen to him if the Supreme Court strikes down DACA : I grew up in Minneapolis .
That ’ s where my family is .
What the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that .
I ’ ve been feeling really inspired over the last couple of weeks , actually , to see how folks have been taking to the streets .
It ’ s a reminder about how folks are winning victories all across the country , whether it ’ s the victory that the Supreme Court helped to deliver around employment nondiscrimination , whether it ’ s DACA , whether it ’ s what we ’ re seeing from the Black Lives Matter movement .
People who are most impacted are the folks that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that are going to push us toward the change that we deserve .
Cynthia Garcia came to the US in 2003 from Mexico when she was 16 and received DACA status in 2013 .
She is now a deportation defense hotline manager for United We Dream and lives in Oklahoma City , Oklahoma .
She identifies as queer .
What life was like before DACA : When I enrolled for college before DACA came into the picture , one of the biggest discouragements was that , every semester , I had to sign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said that I was disclosing that I was undocumented and that the school I was attending was not responsible for me .
That was uncomfortable , to say the least , and so after three semesters , I decided not to finish my college journey .
There is a level of uncertainty that comes from being undocumented .
It doesn ’ t feel that way when you just identify as queer .
I came out as an openly queer woman back in 2007 , in my junior year of high school .
When @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do a lot of internal work and get the acceptance of my predominantly conservative family .
Coming out as undocumented was different .
Outside folks were like , “ Well , why haven ’ t you fixed it ?
You could have waited in line ” — almost like a dismissal of what it really means to be undocumented .
I was old enough to know the struggles that my parents went through to bring us on a visa , coming from a rural , low-income community .
The doors DACA opened for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ started being more proactive with a local nonprofit that supported folks in adjustment of status and DACA applications , I found I was beginning to develop more of a leadership role .
I started hosting “ Know Your Rights ” presentations for the community .
And so I fell in love with the idea of giving power back to people to decide how they respond to the immigration enforcement they are facing .
What the Supreme Court ’ s decision in Bostock means to her : For me , Monday ’ s ruling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DACA recipient and someone that identifies as LGBTQ .
It gave me hope that we can potentially have a positive decision when a DACA decision comes before they end their session .
I think I also had conflicted feelings around how , even in LGBTQ spaces , I struggle a little bit finding visibility and really understanding why is it that queer spaces don ’ t see the full humanity of undocumented immigrants , or don ’ t feel so welcoming for people of color .
For someone in Oklahoma City like me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that exist currently are very white and male .
So even for women who are [ people of color ] , they are still toxic environments .
I think we have to actively reshape the narrative around how queer people still have privilege in this country when the systems are based on racial inequity .
White people need to do the emotional work to make sure what is considered progressive spaces of queer people are not just anti-racist , but pro-black , pro-people of color , pro-immigrant .
Tony Choi came to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and received his DACA status in 2012 , when he was 23 .
He will soon start a new job as a digital director for a nonprofit organization and currently lives in Hackensack , New Jersey .
He identifies as gay .
The doors DACA opened for him : Before getting my DACA , I was working at a takeout restaurant and getting paid $ 5 an hour .
After DACA was announced , I immediately got a job with a local nonprofit helping other Korean-Americans like me get their DACA status , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve done .
I worked for the Women ’ s March .
I worked on a presidential campaign for Tom Steyer — something that even most citizens can ’ t say they ’ ve done .
DACA has gotten me to amazing places .
I do have a sense of guilt because DACA is no longer open to younger people and a certain subset of millennials , like Jose Antonio Vargas , who ’ s a really great friend of mine .
I do have a deep sense of guilt that those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like them .
What it would mean if he had to go back to Korea : I contemplated going back to Korea when I was younger .
But there is no marriage equality in Korea and virtually no protection for LGBTQ workers .
And there ’ s mandatory military service for all men below the age of 40 .
It ’ s not a friendly place to be openly gay or queer .
I ’ m very scared of what could happen to me in the Korean military .
Korea isn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I was 9 .
All my life is here .
My family is here , and we ’ re a mixed-status family — there are members of my family who are US citizens who depend on me to provide for them .
I contribute toward my mother ’ s rent .
If I ’ m gone , who will support them ?
It would be an immeasurable harm .
In the LGBTQ community , there ’ s a concept of chosen family aside from our biological families .
We get our support and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to have around us , and I would be losing my entire chosen family on top of losing everything else .
I ’ ve lived my life as an out , queer person for the last 10 years , and if I hadn ’ t been able to do that , I would be so alone and isolated .
How he views recent progress on LBGTQ and immigrant rights : It always feels like these battles are never won at the same time .
I see LGBTQ rights advancing while immigrants ’ rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t think there have been any significant immigration policy victories since the announcement of DACA .
I really wish it could progress in tandem .
I never had high hopes in the political process .
Conservatives have a majority in the courts .
My fate is now in the hands of Neil Gorsuch , Samuel Alito , Brett Kavanaugh , and Clarence Thomas .
But I do have high hopes for directly affected people like me to be able to effect change .
I think the Supreme Court is taking notice that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I genuinely do think all of the recent social upheaval has been a major contributing factor in them delaying this particular decision [ in the DACA case ] .
Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

For José Alonso Muñoz, the prospect of coming out as queer to his friends wasn’t nearly as difficult as coming out as an unauthorized immigrant. A so-called “DREAMer” who arrived in the US as a child, he was told to conceal his immigration status for fear of facing deportation, and that fear stayed with him into adulthood until he felt he couldn’t be silent any longer.
“When Trump was elected, it was a pivotal moment for a lot of people,” he said. “For me, it became really important to be able to share my story and to be able to tell the stories of other people, specifically LGBTQ folks.”
This Supreme Court term is especially pivotal for DREAMers like Muñoz who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, or queer.
On Monday, the justices issued a landmark decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, finding that federal law prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, a hard-won victory for activists.
On Thursday, it issued another momentous decision for immigrants on the fate of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which has allowed almost 670,000 unauthorized immigrants known as DREAMers who arrived in the US when they were children to continue to live and work in the country without fear of deportation. President Donald Trump tried to terminate the program, barring new applications from tens of thousands of other immigrants who would be eligible until legal challenges are resolved. The Supreme Court ruled that Trump may not immediately terminate the program.
Vox spoke to several LGBTQ DREAMers between Monday’s decision and Thursday’s. For them, Bostock marked a moment to celebrate and mobilize — and gave them hope that the public would have rallied behind them had Trump ended DACA.
But for some, it was also a reminder that the fight for their rights hasn’t ended yet — at the Supreme Court, in public policy, and in LGBTQ communities where people of color have not always felt welcome.
Three DREAMers shared what it was like to grow up as unauthorized immigrants in the US, what the Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock means to them, and what they fear about an adverse ruling in the DACA case.
José Alonso Muñoz
José Alonso Muñoz came to the US from Mexico when he was 3 months old and received DACA status in 2013, when he was 22. He’s now the national communications manager for United We Dream, an organization that advocates for DREAMers, and lives in Washington, DC. He identifies as queer.
What life was like before DACA: I had to pay out of pocket for college. I was able to get a couple of scholarships, but back in 2008, financial aid for undocumented students wasn’t around at the time. And so it was actually really hard to go to school because it was just too expensive. I went to school on and off — I would go for a year and then I would have to take a year off because I couldn’t afford to go back, and I worked in a restaurant to save money. When DACA came around, it allowed me to go back and finish school.
Why he previously avoided talking about being an unauthorized immigrant: I came out to a lot of my friends when I was maybe 19 or 20. I actually was a lot more open about being queer than I was about being undocumented. Growing up, there were a lot of conversations that I had with my parents about what it meant to be undocumented — that I could be deported — when I was really young, maybe like 9 or 10. I think that was very pervasive even into adulthood, which made it harder for me. I didn’t actually meet another person who was undocumented outside of my family until my senior year of high school.
What the Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock means to him: I had been following it and the death of Aimee Stephens back in May. She was clearly such a trailblazer, and I think for me, it’s just a reminder of how, as LGBTQ people in the United States, our fight has been really led by trans people. It’s important to be able to celebrate this moment as a victory while also recognizing that, for trans folks, specifically black trans people, there’s still so much work that needs to be done to ensure that everyone is able to live and thrive without fear.
It’s such a great reminder that so many of us have such intersecting identities. LGBTQ people are undocumented. Black folks are DACA recipients.
What will happen to him if the Supreme Court strikes down DACA: I grew up in Minneapolis. That’s where my family is. What the Supreme Court decides doesn’t change that. I’ve been feeling really inspired over the last couple of weeks, actually, to see how folks have been taking to the streets. It’s a reminder about how folks are winning victories all across the country, whether it’s the victory that the Supreme Court helped to deliver around employment nondiscrimination, whether it’s DACA, whether it’s what we’re seeing from the Black Lives Matter movement. People who are most impacted are the folks that are having the solutions for us and that are going to push us toward the change that we deserve.
Cynthia Garcia
Cynthia Garcia came to the US in 2003 from Mexico when she was 16 and received DACA status in 2013. She is now a deportation defense hotline manager for United We Dream and lives in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. She identifies as queer.
What life was like before DACA: When I enrolled for college before DACA came into the picture, one of the biggest discouragements was that, every semester, I had to sign an affidavit of intent, which basically said that I was disclosing that I was undocumented and that the school I was attending was not responsible for me. That was uncomfortable, to say the least, and so after three semesters, I decided not to finish my college journey.
There is a level of uncertainty that comes from being undocumented. It doesn’t feel that way when you just identify as queer. I came out as an openly queer woman back in 2007, in my junior year of high school. When I came out, I had to do a lot of internal work and get the acceptance of my predominantly conservative family.
Coming out as undocumented was different. Outside folks were like, “Well, why haven’t you fixed it? You could have waited in line” — almost like a dismissal of what it really means to be undocumented. I was old enough to know the struggles that my parents went through to bring us on a visa, coming from a rural, low-income community.
The doors DACA opened for her: In 2017, when I started being more proactive with a local nonprofit that supported folks in adjustment of status and DACA applications, I found I was beginning to develop more of a leadership role. I started hosting “Know Your Rights” presentations for the community. And so I fell in love with the idea of giving power back to people to decide how they respond to the immigration enforcement they are facing.
What the Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock means to her: For me, Monday’s ruling was a hopeful one, as a DACA recipient and someone that identifies as LGBTQ. It gave me hope that we can potentially have a positive decision when a DACA decision comes before they end their session.
I think I also had conflicted feelings around how, even in LGBTQ spaces, I struggle a little bit finding visibility and really understanding why is it that queer spaces don’t see the full humanity of undocumented immigrants, or don’t feel so welcoming for people of color. For someone in Oklahoma City like me, the majority of the queer spaces that exist currently are very white and male. So even for women who are [people of color], they are still toxic environments.
I think we have to actively reshape the narrative around how queer people still have privilege in this country when the systems are based on racial inequity. White people need to do the emotional work to make sure what is considered progressive spaces of queer people are not just anti-racist, but pro-black, pro-people of color, pro-immigrant.
Tony Choi
Tony Choi came to the US at age 9 from South Korea and received his DACA status in 2012, when he was 23. He currently lives in Hackensack, New Jersey. He identifies as gay.
The doors DACA opened for him: Before getting my DACA, I was working at a takeout restaurant and getting paid $5 an hour. After DACA was announced, I immediately got a job with a local nonprofit helping other Korean-Americans like me get their DACA status, and that led me to everything I’ve done. I worked for the Women’s March. I worked on a presidential campaign for Tom Steyer — something that even most citizens can’t say they’ve done. DACA has gotten me to amazing places.
I do have a sense of guilt because DACA is no longer open to younger people and a certain subset of millennials, like Jose Antonio Vargas, who’s a really great friend of mine. I do have a deep sense of guilt that those protections don’t exist for folks like them.
What it would mean if he had to go back to Korea: I contemplated going back to Korea when I was younger. But there is no marriage equality in Korea and virtually no protection for LGBTQ workers. And there’s mandatory military service for all men below the age of 40. It’s not a friendly place to be openly gay or queer. I’m very scared of what could happen to me in the Korean military.
Korea isn’t a place I’ve been since I was 9. All my life is here. My family is here, and we’re a mixed-status family — there are members of my family who are US citizens who depend on me to provide for them. I contribute toward my mother’s rent. If I’m gone, who will support them? It would be an immeasurable harm.
In the LGBTQ community, there’s a concept of chosen family aside from our biological families. We get our support and nourishment through the people that we choose to have around us, and I would be losing my entire chosen family on top of losing everything else. I’ve lived my life as an out, queer person for the last 10 years, and if I hadn’t been able to do that, I would be so alone and isolated.
How he views recent progress on LBGTQ and immigrant rights: It always feels like these battles are never won at the same time. I see LGBTQ rights advancing while immigrants’ rights have stalled since 2012. I don’t think there have been any significant immigration policy victories since the announcement of DACA. I really wish it could progress in tandem.
I never had high hopes in the political process. Conservatives have a majority in the courts. My fate is now in the hands of Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, and Clarence Thomas. But I do have high hopes for directly affected people like me to be able to effect change. I think the Supreme Court is taking notice that the election is in five months. I genuinely do think all of the recent social upheaval has been a major contributing factor in them delaying this particular decision [in the DACA case].