Nonprofits Purge Websites of Diversity Language in Futile Attempt to Appease MAGA Inquisitors

Janine Jackson

ProPublica (12/17/25) offered examples of mission statements revised to avoid suggestions of supporting diversity, equity or inclusion. 

ProPublica data reporter Ellis Simani (12/17/25) reviewed many of the mission statements that nonprofits included in tax filings sent to the IRS this year. He found that over a thousand nonprofits had removed or minimized language tied to race, inequity and historically disadvantaged communities in their mission statements, with some also scrubbing DEI language from their websites, job titles and, in some cases, even the group’s name.

Most groups "declined to discuss" the changes, as you might imagine. But Simani outlined some strategies groups that made changes seemed to follow: Don’t name disadvantaged groups; don’t actually acknowledge the past; gloss over details. So you’re no longer “helping underserved communities,” for example, because that means people were underserved in the unquestionably greatest country in the world.

You can't ask students about "overcoming obstacles" because that would suggest that there are obstacles in made-great-again America (Boston Globe, 12/12/25).

The changes illustrate that threats of funding cuts don’t just endanger nonprofits, they cow them and warp them—a chilling effect that illustrates why putting political strings on funding is a violation of the First Amendment. But one still has to wonder if nonprofits really think such deletions and revisions are going to spare them from the Trump administration's budget knives.

Consider the fact that Trump has issued a directive (Higher Ed Dive, 8/7/25) ordering data from colleges about the race and gender of applicants, and their admitted and enrolled students. What that means in practice: As a Boston Globe report (12/12/25) put it:

Over the past year, the federal government has flagged "cues" such as personal essays, along with narratives about "overcoming obstacles" and "diversity statements," as being potentially unlawful: a stand-in for talking about race.

Admission prompts as innocuous as asking about "lived experience" or "community" are seen as suspect—because, wink, that’s just code for DEI, which means “you don’t really belong here.”

The Supreme Court banned colleges from considering race and ethnicity in admissions, but did not rule on admissions essays. So this is the White House thinking they’re skating where the puck’s gonna be. But we can take heart in a headline from the Washington Times (12/3/25), of all places: “Most Universities Ignore Trump Administration's Ban on Diversity-Themed Admission Essays.”