ネット上に見つかる次の文章でも

In Batson v. Kentucky, the Court adopted the McDonnell Douglas
framework from employment law, which, as traditionally applied,
requires an alleged discriminator to offer a non-discriminatory
reason for its action and requires the alleged victim to prove
the explanation is pretextual. A comparison between employment
cases and peremptory challenge cases, however, reveals that the
methods that employees use for proving pretext are generally
unavailing for defendants making Batson challenges. The judicial
focus on pretext thereby effectively prevents many defendants
from proving discrimination.

provingが動名詞として2か所で持ちられているので
「proving なんて使い方はないんだが」という指摘が
何を意味しているかさらに気になるところ