The “Central Park Karen,” who was filmed last summer calling the police on a Black birdwatcher and accusing him of attacking her, is now suing her former employer for racial discrimination.

Amy Cooper is accusing her former employer, Franklin Templeton, of depicting her as a “privileged white female Karen.” The lawsuit claims that the company didn’t interview Amy nor her victim, Christian Cooper, during its investigation.

In the federal suit filed in Manhattan court, Amy argues that she did not call the police on Christian because of his race. Instead, she says that she was frightened by the man, who was an “overzealous birdwatcher” that engaged in a feud between dog lovers and birdwatchers.

The “Karen” went viral in May 2020 when a video surfaced of her yelling at Christian and told a 911 operator that an “African American man” was “threatening” her as she walked her dog in Central Park.

Franklin Templeton terminated Amy one day after the incident, saying in a statement that it does “not tolerate racism of any kind.”

Following the racist rant, Amy was charged with third-degree falsely reporting an incident by the Manhattan District Attorney’s office last summer. However, the charge was dropped by prosecutors after Amy underwent therapy.

Amy Cooper seeks unspecified damages for defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, and racial discrimination.

Over the weekend, NBA Hall of Famer Dominique Wilkins claimed that he was turned away from an Atlanta restaurant, Le Bilboquet, and he believes that it was because of the color of his skin.

He tweeted: “In my many years in the world, I’ve eaten at some of the greatest restaurants in the world, but never have I felt prejudice or been turned away because of the color of my skin until today in #atlanta In @LeBilboquetAtl #turnedawaybecauseimblack”

Since then, the restaurant has issued two statements regarding the incident that took place.

The first statement issued has since been deleted, but as you know, whatever is posted to the internet is there forever; the post read:

“We do our best to accommodate all of our guests. We have a “business casual” dress code which includes jeans & sneakers but prohibits athletic clothing, including sweat pants & tops. The definition of “casual” is ever-evolving; we strive to maintain our policy requirements daily.”

The second post was an apology directly for Wilkins; it read:

“We want to apologize to Mr. Wilkins for his experience at our restaurant and also for any confusion our dress code may have caused. We in no way intended for him to feel unwanted and welcome an open dialogue with him. Our upscale dining experience and our brand’s culture is made up of multiple elements, which include our music, our food, and our patrons’ attire. We continue to strive to manifest our dining experience in a way that is exciting and, most importantly, inclusive.”

According to HuffPost, one of the lawyers on the second impeachment trial team of Donald Trump previously used racial stereotypes to kick Black people off a jury, claiming that one of them “shucked and jived” in court.

Greg Harris is one of four lawyers in South Carolina who make up Trump’s impeachment team’s “core.”

Harris will be defending a former racist president who inspired a deadly attack on the U.S. Capitol by a mob that included a large contingent of white supremacists.

In 1989, when Harris served as an assistant solicitor in South Carolina’s 5th Judicial Circuit Solicitor’s Office, the South Carolina Supreme Court found that he had used racial stereotypes to strike two Black jurors during a DUI trial.

Though the South Carolina Supreme Court didn’t explicitly name Harris in the ruling, HuffPost confirmed that he was the prosecutor in question. In the DUI case, Philip Mace, the counsel for the Black female claimant, told HuffPost that Harris used nine out of 10 of his strikes against Black prospective jurors over the course of two trials.

Mace said, “When I challenged him on it, Greg said he didn’t have a racist or discriminatory bone in his body. I remember that.”

In one case, Harris struck a 43-year-old Black juror who he believed walked too slow, spoke too low, and was somewhat old. In another case, during jury selection, he told the trial judge he hit another prospective juror because he was unemployed and “seemed disinterested.” But he added a racial stereotype as well.

Harris told the court, “I watched him as he walked from the jury panel to the microphone, and I have noted that he ― he shucked and jived is what I had. That’s just my analysis of the way he walked up here.”

Initially, the trial judge at the time didn’t find Harris’s use of a stereotype to be a pattern of racial discrimination and that Harris had articulated racially neutral motives for striking jurors.

The South Carolina Supreme Court disagreed.

Although unemployment was held up as a race-neutral reason for hitting a juror, as was the case in many jurisdictions, the South Carolina Supreme Court found the use of a racial stereotype “troublesome” by Harris and proof of deliberate discrimination.

“The trial court failed to inquire into or comment on the prosecutor’s explanation that the juror was struck because he ‘shucked and jived.’ The use of this racial stereotype is evidence of the prosecutor’s subjective intent to discriminate,” the court ruled in 1989.

The Supreme Court ruled that if defendants bring an equal protection argument based on the unfair use of peremptory challenges, the limited number of objections that lawyers can make about proposed jurors without giving a reason prosecutors need to provide a race-neutral justification of their jury strikes.

South Carolina, like America, has a violent history of racism and white supremacy. Mace said the state Supreme Court ruling was a “great decision” that resulted in a “sea change.”

“It was not a difficult argument to make,” Mace said. “I came out of it with a little paper certificate from the ACLU, and Greg got a promotion to assistant United States attorney.”

Harris actually went on to serve in South Carolina as a federal prosecutor. He is also the former chairman of the South Carolina Ethics Commission and “has been involved in a number of high-profile cases and clients,” including serving as an expert witness for former Gov. Nikki Haley.

Mace said that Harris is a “pretty competent lawyer.” He was less generous to former South Carolina Attorney General Charlie Condon.

“Charlie, as attorney general, all he did was push to keep the Confederate flag flying over the state Capitol dome and to keep women out of The Citadel military college,” Mace said. “I’d bring Rudy Giuliani back before I’d employ Charlie Condon as my attorney.”

Adding that Harris is “probably very, very conservative,” but he’d consider hiring Harris if he were in serious criminal trouble.

“But I’m a white guy,” he added.

Multiple workers at an Olive Garden located in the heart of Times Square have filed charges of race- and gender-based discrimination against Darden Restaurants, Inc. at the state’s Human Rights Division and the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

According to People, one employee named Adam Jones, self-described as “an African-American, gay man” alleges that he had witnessed a “hostile work environment” and racial discrimination at the Times Square Olive Garden dating back to September 2008, when he began working at the restaurant. Darden, the restaurant’s parent company, denies all of the allegations.

Jones alleged that he and his fellow Black coworkers “are consistently denied the preferential treatment granted to non-Black workers,” such as the opportunity for advancement, more desirable work shifts, being assigned as servers to the “best tables” and more.

Jones claims he voiced concerns to management late last year and started to see correction, but that changed when he was furloughed in March due to Covid-19.

“In or around September 30, 2020, the restaurant began selecting some people to return to work once the restaurant was allowed to run at a limited capacity,” Jones writes, alleging, “Who was chosen to return to work was not based on seniority or experience. Only a few Black workers were selected to return.”

In a statement refuting the allegations, Darden Restaurants claims these are “baseless” allegations.

“Darden is a values-based company built on a culture of integrity and fairness, respect and caring, and a longstanding commitment to diversity and inclusion,” they said. “We have an industry-leading team member experience. Across our brands, tipped team members earn, on average, more than $20 per hour. We have one of the lowest hourly turnover rates in the industry — 50% better than the industry average.”

A group of former McDonald’s employees has filed a lawsuit against the fast-food company, citing racial discrimination.

According to the Business Insider, former employees Selynda Middlebrook, Stephanie Stevens, and Luther Gray—who will act on his minor daughter A.G.’s behalf, came together to file suit Tuesday in the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois. Stevens and Middlebrook, as well as Gray’s 17-year-old daughter, who also worked at the location, claimed Black employees were called “ghetto” by the location’s general manager.

The suit also alleged that other employees—assuming employees not identified as people of color—labeled Black co-workers “lazy” or “smelly.” Furthermore, Black employees also reportedly received fewer work hours than non-black employees, according to the complaint.

Middlebrook called out the general manager for saying she was a “waste of space” and said her hours were reduced in the earlier part of 2020. As a result, she said she struggled to support her newborn. Middlebrook is the niece of Stevens, who stood up to the general manager by saying she shouldn’t talk to employees in a “discriminatory and demeaning manner.” She was fired that same day.

“We are sick and tired of being considered less than human and not even worthy of life,” Middlebrook said on a call with reporters on Tuesday.

The recently filed lawsuit is now the fourth racial-discrimination suit against the fast-food chain in 2020. The owner of the Illinois location issued a statement: “I am deeply committed to running a values-led organization, and discrimination, harassment or retaliation of any kind are not tolerated in my restaurants,” Trina Gendron said. “I take these allegations seriously and am currently reviewing the complaint and investigating these allegations.”

The suit hopes to highlight the ongoing systemic racism going on in McDonald’s culture.

In January, two executives sued the company for racial discrimination and “cruel” retaliation. By July, a second was filed by another trio of McDonald’s employees who said they also experienced racial discrimination at a Florida location. Those same plaintiffs chose to amend their complaint about what they said was retaliation on McDonald’s behalf; according to the amended portion, the company fired two individuals involved in the suit.

Then, 52 Black former franchise owners united to file a racial-discrimination case after they discovered they were not provided the same opportunities as white franchisees. The coalition also said they were forced out of the company.

“The top-down systemic racism evident in McDonald’s C-suite, as evidenced by recent allegations by Black executives and Black franchisees, reaches down to the restaurant level, where individual managers and franchisees are not held accountable for engaging in, and failing to prevent, discrimination on the basis of race,” the complaint read.

However, in response, the food chain released a statement, saying, “McDonald’s is committed to leading with values and does not tolerate retaliation,” adding that, “The allegations that employees were terminated for any reason related to ongoing litigation is categorically false.”

African American studies professor Chatelain, who works at Georgetown University, believes that there is “no question” that the company launched the collaboration to “try to shore up brand recognition and brand loyalty for McDonald’s on the part of consumers of color.” Mcdonald’s has denied the allegations regarding the collaboration, and the lawsuits filed against them by employees.

In January, one lawsuit was filed by two former executives that accused Mcdonald’s of conducting “a ruthless purge” of their Black employees in management positions. The employees also alleged that the company promoted a “hostile and abusive work environment” for any of the Black executives and franchise owners. Mcdonald’s went from having 42 black employees in such positions in 2014 to seven in 2019.

The second discrimination lawsuit was filed by 52 of its Black franchise owners, claiming that the company took part in “systematic and covert racial discrimination” for decades. Franchise owners claim that the company wanted to open locations in low-income and high-crime areas with high employee turnover rates. They also allege that they have not received any appropriate financial support and that they receive harsher internal reviews than their white peers.

Mcdonald’s USA shared a statement with Complex that read: “Any claim that McDonald’s collaboration with Travis Scott was launched in response to recent litigation is completely false. We teamed up with Travis—and our newest celebrity partner, J Balvin—because of their love for the McDonald’s brand, their widespread appeal and their loyal following among our younger customers and our crew.”

The statement continues: “In regards to the litigation—these allegations fly in the face of everything we stand for as an organization and as a partner to communities and small business owners around the world. Not only do we categorically deny the allegations, but we are confident that the facts will show how committed we are to the diversity and equal opportunity of the McDonald’s System, including across our franchisees, suppliers and employees.”

It was reported last week that Mcdonald’s Corp. sales increased 4.6 percent in July, August, and September when compared to the same time period in 2019. The partnership with Travis Scott also included multiple merchandise collections that quickly sold out.