A conservative advocacy group is targeting diversity and health equity initiatives through a wave of legal challenges.
Diversity in medicine and health equity became a major public health focus during the pandemic after the crisis exposed systemic disparities. Rural, low-income, Black, Latino, and Native American communities experienced disproportionately higher rates of severe hospitalization and death. This prompted nationwide investment and progressive health equity initiatives.
In 2022, Dr. Stanley Goldfarb, the former associate dean at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine, founded Do No Harm. Since its establishment, the group has sought to dismantle these impactful changes by litigating against medical education and medical initiatives focused on advancing health equity and minority representation in medicine. They use federal lawsuits, civil rights complaints, and regulatory petitions to challenge the changes.
“Anti-discrimination laws and basic medical ethics require physicians to treat patients as individuals; race-based care violates these principles,” The group’s Chief Medical Officer Dr. Kurt Miceli told The Center Square.
Black Medical Directories And Platforms Are Being Targeted
Civil rights advocates argue that Do No Harm’s legal campaign against health equity initiatives is in bad faith. They add the group often overlooks the evidence and historical context behind civil rights laws and equity efforts. They also state the lawsuits ignore documented barriers that have contributed to unequal representation and outcomes in health.
The conservative group’s most recent lawsuit was filed in March against Dr. Dina Strachan, the founder of the provider directory “Find A Black Doctor.” Do No Harm member and dermatologist Travis Morrell alleged that he was denied access to the directory based on race. He claims that excluding non-Black physicians, like him, denies advertising opportunities and access to new patients.
In contrast to Morrell’s stance, advocates and supporters of Strachan note that directories, like Find A Black Doctor, emerged in response to poor outcomes, medical mistreatment and discrimination.
“The controversy is not really about a website. It’s about trust,” said Dr. Brittani James, a health equity advocate and co-founder of Co-Twin Village Health Center in Chicago. “The directory didn’t come out of thin air. It emerged within a healthcare system where nearly half of Black patients report experiencing discrimination, where Black women remain far more likely to die from pregnancy-related complications, and where racial disparities persist even after accounting for income and education.”
While the case is still ongoing, its outcome could have broader implications, imposing new cautions on equity-focused initiatives and patient care.
Medical Education Is Also Being Targeted Via Lawsuits
Medical education has become a new front in the debate over race and health equity. The group has made medical education one of its central battlegrounds, challenging how universities select and train future physicians.
Do No Harm v. David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA
In May, the conservative group filed a lawsuit against UCLA, alleging the admissions process considered race and ethnicity through its holistic review system and diversity initiatives.
Do No Harm joined Students for Fair Admissions to file the lawsuit. The organization was behind the Supreme Court case ending race-conscious affirmative action in college admissions. Both groups allege that these practices disadvantaged white and Asian applicants.
In January, the Department of Justice, under Attorney General Pamela Bondi, intervened in the federal lawsuit. The DOJ launched a civil rights investigation into the school’s admissions practices.
The lawsuit remains ongoing. UCLA has disputed the allegations, with leaders arguing its admissions process complies with state and federal law.
Do No Harm v. University of Washington School of Medicine
In 2024, the group sued the University of Washington over a directory intended to connect Black, Indigenous and ethnic students with physicians.
The lawsuit was later dismissed following a settlement after the university of Washington changed the program’s structure. The university dismantled the race-exclusive criteria and shifted the focus to supporting first-generation medical students.
They also rebranded the program name and updated its portal to explicitly open access to all students.
Do No Harm v. University of Colorado
The group has also targeted financial and educational support programs aimed at increasing underrepresentation in medicine. In December 2024, Do No Harm sued the University of Colorado’ over its Underrepresented Minorities Visiting Elective Scholarship.
The university’s Radiation Oncology ran a program that provided a $2,000 stipend to help minority medical students. The organization alleged that the university limited eligibility to specific racial, ethnic and LGBTQ+ groups. They claimed the program unlawfully discriminated against white and Asian American students.
A federal judge dismissed the case after a settlement. The University of Washington had to remove the racial eligibility requirements from the program.
Do No Harm v. Texas Tech University
In March, Do No Harm filed civil rights complaints against US-based residency programs with too many foreign-trained clinicians. The conservative group filed complaints against Texas Tech University, Corewell Health and HCA Healthcare, alleging national origin discrimination against Americans.
They claim the residency program’s applicant pool are primarily from foreign countries. According to the group, foreign-trained physicians are being favored, disadvantaging U.S.-trained medical graduates.
Do No Harm Takes Aim At Healthcare Delivery
Do No Harm expanded its legal campaign into hospital systems. The wave of aggressive lawsuits challenge how healthcare organizations approach patient care, workforce diversity and institutional equity programs.
While health equity advocates argue equity focused programs are intended to address longstanding disparities in healthcare access, trust, and representation, conservatives frame these lawsuits as efforts to enforce civil rights protections and laws.
Do No Harm v. University of Pennsylvania
Do No Harm’s campaign against health systems began with a challenge to the University of Pennsylvania’s Black Doctor Directory. Last year, the group filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the University of Pennsylvania Health System, the Perelman School of Medicine, and the Consortium of DEI Health Educators. The lawsuit targeted tools and electronic protocols that were designed to connect patients with physicians of similar backgrounds.
The lawsuit was settled after Penn Medicine accepted an offer of judgment. The school agreed to open its formerly “Black Doctors Directory” to all physicians and rename it.
Do No Harm v. Kaiser Permanente
Kaiser’s Center for Black Health & Wellness, a facility aimed at addressing racial disparities, is under litigation by Do No Harm.
Earlier this year, the group filed a civil rights complaint with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights against Kaiser Permanente. The complaint alleged that the center operated as a racially exclusive program by prioritizing Black patients and racial identity in staffing decisions. They allege that the center violates federal anti-discrimination protections because Kaiser Permanente receives federal healthcare funding.
Following the complaint, Kaiser Permanente updated public information about the center to clarify that it serves patients of all races and ethnicities. The administrative complaint remains under review. Do No Harm has argued that the update does not address its broader concerns about the program’s structure.
Healthcare Employment Under Litigation
Do No Harm’s legal strategy expanded beyond hospitals and medical schools into corporate hiring programs designed to build recruitment pipelines for underrepresented groups.
In 2022, Do No Harm filed a federal lawsuit against Pfizer over its Breakthrough Fellowship Program, an initiative designed to expand the company’s recruitment pipeline for Black, Latino, and Native American employees.
The program offered undergraduate juniors paid summer internships, two years of full-time employment after graduation, and fully funded graduate school scholarships.
Do No Harm alleged that the fellowship unlawfully excluded white and Asian American applicants by limiting eligibility based on race.
The case was initially dismissed after the court found that Do No Harm lacked standing to bring the challenge. After the case was revisited on appeal, both parties ultimately settled in 2025 after Pfizer changed the fellowship’s eligibility criteria to allow applicants regardless of race and closed the program.
The group has similarly targeted corporate diversity policies within healthcare networks. In April, Do No Harm sued multi-hospital healthcare provider Beacon Health System over diversity initiatives and demographic hiring criteria. That same month, they filed a lawsuit against Valley Health Systems, alleging that the organization used demographic criteria in hiring, advancement programs and scholarship initiatives.
Both cases are ongoing. However, the rapid escalation of lawsuits raise the stakes of compliance, forcing institutions to choose between equity commitments or costly litigation.
