This doesn't seem purposeful. It seems like someone finding confirmation bias because a group more likely to identify with their beliefs has been partially lef

This doesn't seem purposeful. It seems like someone finding confirmation bias because a group more likely to identify with their beliefs has been partially left out (in this case). At least for the "anti-black" case mentioned, here's the case itself: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-6th-circuit/1604783.html https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-6th-circuit/1604783.html Reading over the technical part, it seems like an honest mistake. Who's to say everyone doesn't end up affected at some point or another? I agree we always ought to minimize such errors, but they're arguably better than the human alternative (against which many accusations of various biases have been leveled). I think we're more likely to find examples of this because the normal cases (where minority groups aren't affected) aren't litigated as widely.