legal theory of reverse discrimination against white Americans

Come down to feelings and something beautiful:


White fragility' lawsuit exposes emptiness of 'anti-Woke' movement | Reuters
In recent opinions, Republican- and Democratic-appointed judges have described legal arguments that white plaintiffs were harmed by pro-diversity initiatives or education about racism as nonsensical, flatly wrong, disorienting doublespeak, and insulting to Black, LGBTQ and other historically disadvantaged groups.

Courts have found that those plaintiffs lacked the basic elements – there was no evidence whatsoever of discriminatory motives nor was anyone actually harmed. What's more, they've held that laws barring education about systemic bias violate First Amendment rights and are unconstitutionally vague.

At bottom, the reverse discrimination arguments cannot legitimately support outlawing diversity initiatives and education about non-white history.

Whether or not their policies and lawsuits will ultimately be successful is a question for the higher courts.

Still, whatever happens, it's clear enough that the movement reflects a backlash to advancing awareness of systemic racism, rather than opposition to any supposed anti-white discrimination.