Oakland-based e.l.f. Beauty embraces DEI, and you won’t believe its ad campaign

Another Wall Street Giant Retreats From Its DEI Efforts

e.l.f. Beauty’s Woke Agenda: Inside the Beauty Brand’s DEI and Left-Wing Activism

Companies Reviewing GLP-1 Coverage Should Also Review Transgender Healthcare Coverage 

According to reports earlier this month, Starbucks is ending GLP-1 coverage for its employees. Under its new healthcare plan, Starbucks will no longer cover prescription drugs used for weight loss, but it will continue to cover comprehensive transgender healthcare interventions, including reconstructive surgical procedures and puberty blockers, for covered dependents. Employers are pulling back on GLP-1 coverage largely for the same reason they are reconsidering other benefits: to adjust to rising healthcare costs. RxBenefits reports that GLP-1 drugs cost roughly $1,000–$1,500 per month, while SHRM estimates employers often shoulder 70–100% of prescription drug costs.  With GLP-1s now accounting for around 20% of prescription drug spending and the number of users accelerating, employers face a limited set of choices: tighten eligibility requirements, shift more of the cost to employees or customers, or eliminate coverage altogether.  If companies can reasonably reconsider GLP-1 coverage because of cost, uncertain return on investment, and broader questions over what an employer-sponsored health plan should cover, why should other expensive medical benefits, such as transgender medical interventions, be exempt from similar scrutiny?  According to February 2026 data from the Human Rights Campaign, more than 550 major companies, including Starbucks, offer comprehensive transgender healthcare benefits to employees and covered dependents. While …

Gender Surgery for Minors Faces a Legal Reckoning

Last year, a federal court in Washington State ruled that Premera Blue Cross unlawfully discriminated when it refused to cover elective double mastectomies for two young girls. The decision read like a harsh warning to every employer: exclude gender-transition procedures for children from your health plan and risk an Affordable Care Act discrimination claim. But the story doesn’t end there. In July 2026, the United States filed a brief urging the Ninth Circuit to reject that court’s misguided reasoning. In a 39-page brief supporting Premera’s appeal, the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division argues that declining to fund these elective sex-denying surgeries for minors is not sex discrimination. “Far from being discrimination on the basis of sex,” the brief states, “this sensible policy is rooted in biological reality, developmental psychology, and medical diagnosis.” The brief anchors its argument in the Supreme Court’s 2025 decision in United States v. Skrmetti, arguing that “regulating medical procedures on the basis of diagnosis does not automatically amount to discrimination on the basis of sex.” Premera covers a mastectomy for a teenage boy with gynecomastia and for a girl with breast cancer but declines to cover the same surgery when it is performed on healthy adolescents—boys and girls alike. The distinction, the brief argues, is …

The Federal Bureaucracy Helped Build DEI’s Infrastructure. A New Rule Seeks to Change That.

1792 Exchange Executive Vice President Greg Scott was referenced by the Daily Signal regarding a proposed rule from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) that would rescind some of the required annual reporting from businesses categorizing employees’ race and sex. 1792 Exchange supports the Commission’s proposal as a long-overdue course correction that reorients the agency to the actual text and original intent of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This change would reduce unnecessary regulatory burden, reaffirm equal opportunity for all, and allow businesses to get back to the work of creating value. Every American business has been treated as a potential suspect, and every employee has been reduced to an overly simplified data point in a group identity spreadsheet. Read the full story at the Daily Signal

HRC Launches Educators for Equality Pledge

As a new school year rolls around, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) launched a new pledge focused on recruiting educators to commit to “ensure every student feels safe, valued, and affirmed.” This Educators for Equality pledge, among other things, asks signatories to:  This initiative fits squarely within HRC’s existing work in schools via its Welcoming Schools program, an “anti-bullying” curriculum that functions as a subversive way to discuss LGBTQ+ topics in the classroom. If that accusation feels like an assertion, consider the fact that the “key resources” HRC highlighted in the pledge sign-up are “pioneering LGBTQ+ and gender-inclusive professional development training, lesson plans, booklists and school advocacy resources specifically designed for educators and youth-serving professionals.”  For example, an “Educator for Equality” might use the Welcoming Schools curriculum to teach 3rd graders about the “Gendersnow Person” as a way to “explore the concepts of gender identity and gender expression” and that there are “many ways to be a girl, boy, both or neither.”  Even a cursory journey through the Welcoming Schools website will clarify HRC’s obsession with getting our schools to focus on modern gender ideology rather than academic excellence. Its School Board Guide is for parents, teachers, and “concerned community member[s]” to learn how to effectively advocate for LGBTQ+ policies, “organize and build power” in their local communities, and hold their school board members “to a higher standard.” Its Self-Care guide provides LGBTQ+ youth with resources to find community support, including TrevorSpace, an online chatroom that allows adults to communicate with minors about LGBTQ+ topics. Adults in …