Opinion| Google failed to convince Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Brian Walsh to dismiss the class action allegations, brought by employees, claiming the company discriminates against job applicants based on their conservative beliefs, race, and gender.
California Republican attorney Harmeet K. Dhillon, a frequent guest of Lou Dobbs, who agreed to represent the aggrieved employees released this statement:
“This ruling is a significant step forward for all California workers, and sends notice to Silicon Valley that discrimination of any kind will not escape legal scrutiny. It is illegal in California to discriminate against an employee for his or her legally protected characteristics, and we are excited to move forward with discovery into Google’s challenged employment practices that our clients allege discriminate on the basis of political orientation, race, and gender.”
The lawsuit was originally brought in January 2018 by James Damore, an engineer who was fired by Google.
Damore was fired in 2017 after he wrote an internal memo — subsequently leaked to the press by leftists within the company — calling for more political diversity at the company.
In the memo, Damore accused the internet behemoth of discriminating against conservatives, men and white people. He has since withdrawn from the suit in favor of arbitration but others, who had subsequently joined with Damore, have continued their pursuit of the internet monolith.
At a January 8, 2018 press conference, the Dhillion Law Group announced that it had filed the class action lawsuit against Google on Damore’s behalf, alleging that the company had failed to protect dissenting political voices from discrimination.
At the time the lawsuit was filed, it was on behalf of both Damore and another Google engineer, David Gudeman. The suit was later joined by two additional employees. With Damore’s withdrawal, the case now defends their interests.
Finally, yesterday, the court denied three different motions to dismiss argued by Google attorneys.
The ruling potentially has enormous legal implications because it clears the way for plaintiffs to begin discovery of Google’s internal documents.
It has long been suspected that people were denied employment because of ”their status as actual or perceived Asian or Caucasian male job applicants.”
As well, it is alleged that employees were routinely discriminated against “because of their actual and perceived conservative political activities.”
Previous leaks have given strong indication of extreme bias against conservatives, white males, and Asians, as well as against President Trump.
Senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology Robert Epstein explained how “Google’s search algorithm can easily shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by 20 percent or more—up to 80 percent in some demographic groups—with virtually no one knowing they are being manipulated, according to experiments” he conducted with Ronald E. Robertson.
Given that many elections are won by small margins, this gives Google the power, right now, to flip upwards of 25 percent of the national elections worldwide. In the United States, half of our presidential elections have been won by margins under 7.6 percent, and the 2012 election was won by a margin of only 3.9 percent—well within Google’s control.
Couple that with a corporate culture that deliberately stifles and eliminates conservatives, and the likelihood of those internal documents revealing more, a whole lot more than a few employees personal grievances, becomes very possible.
This case may hold enormous implications for the preservation of our Constitutional Republic.