Certainly not morally, but there is a pragmatic question of how to best achieve political ends, injustice often creates situations where what brings about the best outcome requires less than perfect choices - in this case, engaging with "imperfect allies" to maintain alliances might be pragmatic even if it puts an unfair burden on minorities.

Not to say all minorities are compelled to do that labor, I do think it's reasonable to make choices about when to invest vs when to protect yourself.

Also worth pointing out than an extreme form of political pragmatism can easily turn into a race to the bottom and undermine important principles - it's not easy to know when or how much to sacrifice in the name of pragmatism.

Psychologically pragmatism can also be used to rationalize and justify toxic respectability politics, throwing the most vulnerable and least desirable elements under the bus (like we see with "transmedicalism").