“Confirmed Judges, Confirmed Fears” is a blog series documenting the harmful impact of President Trump’s judges on Americans’ rights and liberties. It includes judges nominated in both his first and second terms.
Trump judges James Ho and Cory Wilson made the majority in a ruling dismissing a discrimination lawsuit by a former police chief despite evidence that he was fired because of his race. The August 2025 Fifth Circuit case was Glover v. Lafayette City-Parish Consolidated Government.
What was this case about?
This was an employment discrimination case under Title VII. In 2020, Thomas Glover was hired as chief of police for Lafeyette, Louisiana. He was the first Black person to hold this position. But after only a few months, the Lafayette City-Parish Consolidated Government (LCG) fired him.
According to Glover, he was not given a reason for his firing at the time it happened. Although he didn’t have direct evidence, he had reason to believe he was fired because of his race. He stated that the police union had secretly met with LCG’s mayor to complain that Glover had disciplined white police officers for such abuses as striking handcuffed prisoners. He also stated that “certain factions” referred to him as “the Black Lives Matter Chief,” “Black activist,” and “woke.” In addition, a former police sergeant testified that there was a perception in the police force that Glover was punishing White officers at a higher rate than Black officers. This led the former sergeant to conclude that race was a factor in the firing.
During the litigation, LCG claimed they had fired Glover because he had made misrepresentations about a police investigation to two local government officials, and that they had told Glover this at the time. Glover said this reason was simply a pretext made up after the fact.
A seminal 1973 Supreme Court case called McDonnell Douglas sets out how courts are supposed to handle a case like this. If the employee has evidence that the employer’s explanation is a pretext, the case goes to trial, and a jury decides whose version of events to believe. On the other hand, if there is no evidence to show pretext, the court can dismiss the lawsuit without going to trial.
What did the Trump judges do?
The three-judge panel was split 2-1 in an unsigned opinion, with Trump Judges Ho and Wilson making the majority. They ruled that even when the record is viewed most favorably to Glover, it “does not show any racial motivation for his termination.”
According to Ho and Wilson, even if Glover was fired because people resented his disciplining of White police officers, that isn’t about Glover’s race, so it doesn’t implicate Title VII’s prohibition of firing someone because of their race. They also held that the racist comments aren’t relevant because there is no evidence that they were made by or influenced the person who made the decision to fire him. In addition, they concluded that since LCG had no legal obligation to give Glover a reason for firing him, their failure to give him an explanation until there was litigation is not evidence of an illicit motive.
Judge Stephen Higginson (an Obama nominee) dissented and wrote that the case should be decided by a jury. He noted the absence of any contemporaneous written documentation supporting LCG’s later explanation for their action. There was also no contemporaneous evidence that Glover had been untruthful with city officials. Higginson also noted that during the litigation, LCG came up with an additional reason for firing Glover, and that a jury could conclude that its “shifting reasons” was evidence of pretext.
But because of Judges Ho and Wilson, Glover will not be able to make his case to a jury. This ruling illustrates the importance of our federal courts to health, welfare and justice and the significance of having fair-minded judges on the federal bench.