The related idea that the justices who voted in Brown, or the lawyers who
argued against segregation, would have had objections to voluntary efforts to integrate seems equally implausible.
Not exact matches
I don't think anyone would claim that specific groups can't have their own Facebook - like web site, but this particular site is perpetuating a gender
segregation philosophy / ideology that many find abhorrent and readily use their free speech rights to
argue against.
As I said, I don't think people are
arguing against the site, per se, but
against the ideology / philosophy that requires gender
segregation.
Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't think people are
arguing against the website itself, but the idea it represents, i.e. gender
segregation.
Adams came out
against the Rabsky Group's plan to redevelop 200 Harrison Ave. — open land once owned by pharmaceutical giant Pfizer — contrary the community board's recommendation, and instead aligned himself with community groups who've protested the project since last fall,
arguing it perpetuates
segregation in the neighborhood.
Craig Gurian, a lawyer with the Anti-Discrimination Center, launched a lawsuit
against the City in 2015,
arguing the practice of keeping affordable units in housing lotteries for people from the local community worsens racial
segregation, the New York Daily News reported.