View email in browser. ([link removed])
[link removed]
CounterCurrent:
A New Sheriff in Town: On Rolling Back Racial-Preferences in Higher Ed
The Trump administration and Department of Education clarify anti-DEI directives for academia
CounterCurrent is the National Association of Scholars’ weekly newsletter, bringing you the most significant issues in academia and our responses to them.
[link removed]
Category: Department of Education, DEI, Higher Ed;
Reading Time: ~4 minutes
------------------------------------------------------------
**
------------------------------------------------------------
The Trump administration has left little room for ambiguity when interpreting their directives on higher ed's affair with "diversity, equity, and inclusion" (DEI). Still, some colleges and universities appear publicly confused. Thankfully, the Department of Education (ED) is stepping up to clarify the application of nondiscrimination law for higher education in the wake of pro-DEI pushback.
First some background. Trump’s Executive Orders (EOs) “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity” and “Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferences” are the orders which sparked the chain of events coming out of ED. Both orders are movement in the right direction to dismantle DEI in higher education—something the National Association of Scholars (NAS) has long advocated for—as the EOs are necessary and important to guarantee compliance with the Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College (SFFA) Supreme Court decision and to rid higher education of DEI for good.
Regarding the orders, NAS Policy Director Teresa R. Manning explains ([link removed]) on the one hand that the “Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity” order is “more broad, more focused on restoring an ethic of individual character and competence, and, critically, requires federal contractors to certify compliance with DEI bans. This should mean that a school administrator can be held accountable if schools flout Trump’s anti-DEI policies to quietly continue identity politics business as usual ([link removed]) .” Whereas the “Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs” order handles the application of anti-DEI measures—overseen by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and assisted by the Attorney General and the Director of the Office of Personnel
Management—including disbanding of DEI and further assessment of government programs.
These EOs set the stage for ED to—finally—implement anti-discrimination measures and oversee compliance with Civil Rights Law.
On March 1, ED released ([link removed]) a nine-page document of FAQs ([link removed]) in response to its Dear Colleague Letter ([link removed]) (DCL) of February 14, which notified institutions receiving federal funding that they “must cease using race preferences and stereotypes as a factor in their admissions, hiring, promotion, scholarship, prizes, administrative support, sanctions, discipline, and other programs and activities.” The document explains how institutions must comply with not only the EOs, but also with the SFFA decision which pertains to ending racial preferences in college admissions. Additionally, the Office of Civil Rights retains the
ability to interpret the SFFA ruling in its enforcement and regulations of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Though the DCL is clear, “But under any banner, discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin is, has been, and will continue to be illegal,” evidently more clarification was necessary. The DCL spells out ([link removed]) that in order to comply with the law,
All educational institutions are advised to: (1) ensure that their policies and actions comply with existing civil rights law; (2) cease all efforts to circumvent prohibitions on the use of race by relying on proxies or other indirect means to accomplish such ends; and (3) cease all reliance on third-party contractors, clearinghouses, or aggregators that are being used by institutions in an effort to circumvent prohibited uses of race.
Institutions that fail to comply with federal civil rights law may, consistent with applicable law, face potential loss of federal funding.
If any further confusion remains, the ED’s FAQ sheet should clarify lingering questions for academic institutions.
But of course, outspoken proponents of DEI have raised objections to the overhaul of the ideology within academia. Some democrats are calling ([link removed]) for ED to rescind its order that schools will no longer receive federal funding for having DEI programs. Even though several federal judges have blocked ([link removed]) aspects of Trump’s overhauls for the time being, it remains to be seen whether the lawsuits will stick.
Now that Linda McMahon has been confirmed ([link removed]) as Education Secretary, we wait to see her course of action either dismantling ED, or wrangling the department through reform—hopefully the latter ([link removed]) . At this point, ED is bringing about compliance with and accountability to the law for higher education, so McMahon can easily continue this work while cutting down unnecessary programs within the department.
In the meantime, let’s hope that recent events are the catalyst for higher education’s affair with DEI to be put to rest for good—because colleges and universities will not help themselves ([link removed]) .
Until next week.
Kali Jerrard
Communications Associate
National Association of Scholars
Read the Article ([link removed])
For more on the Department of Education, DEI, and higher ed:
[link removed]
March 03, 2025
** Institutions Will Not Cure Themselves—That’s Why Anti-DEI Legislation Is Necessary ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Wood
It is immensely encouraging to see state legislatures proposing and, in some cases, passing bills that would end “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) indoctrination in public colleges and universities.
[link removed]
March 03, 2025
** Accreditation Protects the Status Quo—It’s Time for Drastic Reform ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Gillen
Higher education accreditation is an arcane but vitally important target for reform in the new administration.
[link removed]
September 29, 2024
** Report: Shadows of Influence ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------
Neetu Arnold
Foreign funding of American universities remains an open secret. This report details the underreporting of foreign gifts to universities by analyzing a complementary database compiled using public records requests.
** About the NAS
------------------------------------------------------------
The National Association of Scholars, founded in 1987, emboldens reasoned scholarship and propels civil debate. We’re the leading organization of scholars and citizens committed to higher education as the catalyst of American freedom.
============================================================
Follow NAS on social media.
** Facebook ([link removed])
** Twitter ([link removed])
** YouTube ([link removed])
** Website ([link removed])
** Donate ([link removed])
| ** Join ([link removed])
| ** Renew ([link removed])
| ** Bookstore ([link removed])
Copyright © 2025 National Association of Scholars, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in via our website, membership or donation forms, contact forms at events, or by signing open letters.
Our mailing address is:
National Association of Scholars
13 West 36th Street
4th Floor
New York, NY 10018-7138
USA
Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
.
