From Sentinel's Forbes article:
"CRT is a theoretical perspective that asserts that race is always about inequality and domination. "
This is simply wrong (a lie?). At best a strawman that allows the author to then attack CRT.
Critical race theory (CRT) is a body of legal scholarship and an academic movement of US civil-rights scholars and activists who seek to critically examine the intersection of race and US law and to challenge mainstream American liberal approaches to racial justice. CRT examines social, cultural, and legal issues primarily as they relate to race and racism in the US. A tenet of CRT is that racism and disparate racial outcomes are the result of complex, changing, and often subtle social and institutional dynamics, rather than explicit and intentional prejudices of individuals. en.wikipedia.org
Key phrases in the above:
intersection of race and US law
examines social, cultural, and legal issues
disparate racial outcomes
One would have to deny there were disparate racial outcomes on numerous issues not to support CRT.
So, are their disparate racial outcomes on numerous issues in America? If so, CRT attempts to examine them.
Theoretical example: Perhaps the cause of the disparate racial outcomes are solely caused by the actions of POC. Wouldn't that be a hoot? My instinct says differently.