n 2023, the Supreme Court ruled in SFFA v. Harvard that discriminating on the basis of race in college admissions violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.1 As a result, the legality of corporate affirmative action programs was called into question2 and thirteen Attorneys General warned that SFFA implicated corporate affirmative action programs.3In 2024, those implications widened when the Supreme Court ruled in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protects against discriminatory job transfers.4 The ruling lowered the bar for employees to successfully sue their employers for discrimination,5 and is therefore likely to lead to an increase in discrimination claims.Also in 2024, in American Alliance for the Equal Rights v. Fearless Fund, the Eleventh Circuit held that offering grants only to minority entrepreneurs is substantially likely to violate the Civil Rights Act prohibition against race discrimination in private contracting.6Finally, again in 2024, the Fifth Circuit ruled that the SEC exceeded its authority in approving Nasdaq’s diversity disclosure rule. Importantly, the court noted that the SEC was unable to argue that diversity is good for business because the totality of relevant studies cited by Nasdaq did not support such a claim.7Around the same time as SFFA, Starbucks was successfully sued for “reverse discrimination” with damages of $25.6 million,8 and the risk being sued for such discrimination is rising.9Despite these obvious risks, Target apparently continues to practice affirmative action in at least the following ways:(1) “spend more than $2 billion on Black-owned businesses”10(2) “spending more than 5% of our annual media budget with Black-owned media companies”11(3) Devoting a DEI page to “Black Team Members & Guests”12(4) Setting “DE&I goals” to build “a workforce that represents the communities it serves”13Dividing employees and other stakeholders on the basis of race, and then allocating benefits on that basis, may be deemed immoral, illegal, and a breach of duty. With 400,000-plus employees,14 Target likely has thousands of employees, job applicants, and other stakeholders who are potentially victims of this type of discrimination. If even a fraction of them file suit, and only some of those prove successful, the cost to Target could reach billions of dollars. Accordingly, it is imperative that Target take action to assess the risks created by its affirmative action programs.