CounterCurrent: Week of 01/27/25
Donald Trump’s first week in office has been a busy one. With twenty-six executive orders signed on the first day of his second term alone, the slew of orders have encompassed everything from sweeping immigration measures and border security to terminating commitment to “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) across the federal government.
The National Association of Scholars has already commented on a few of the executive orders that regard education, including the rescission of DEI programs—which includes the Department of Education (ED). Along with the “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity” executive order, the stage has been set for more detailed policies to follow that will force higher education to take a hard look at its preferences for DEI over merit.
Speaking of the ED, there have been some measures already taken to rid the department of DEI. The ED has dissolved the department’s Diversity and Inclusion Council, canceled ongoing DEI training and service contracts, and placed staff tasked with implementing the previous administration’s DEI initiatives on paid administrative leave, among other things. The ED has promised to continue comprehensive review of programs and services “that may be advancing a divisive DEI agenda.” Another quick turnaround, but there is more to be done.
This is all good and well, but will an executive order be enough to eradicate DEI programs and initiatives for good? Will DEI and its ideological counterparts simply be renamed or rebranded? DEI is deeply entrenched in higher education, with and without the Department of Education’s commitment to it. The next step? Simply put, “We urge the Trump administration to fulfill the spirit of these executive orders as swiftly as possible—and, wherever possible, to undergird these executive orders with statutes that confirm their broad democratic support and make it more difficult for a later administration to undo these reforms.” Time will tell if the Trump executive orders are followed up with strong policy that upholds Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and leaves DEI practices in the past once and for all.
A new story out of the University of Colorado-Boulder (CU Boulder) is the latest example of DEI gone wild.
Through a series of public records requests, John D. Sailer and Louis Galarowicz uncovered how CU Boulder’s administrators, department heads, and professors worked together to further racial preferences in hiring. The university’s Faculty Diversity Action Plan (FDAP)—which was restructured and renamed as the Critical Needs Hiring Program (CNHP) in 2023—is “a special funding program for diversity-focused faculty hiring.” Through their FOIA requests, Sailer and Galarowicz uncovered the depth of the program’s successful proposals. One example being,
In a hiring proposal that the National Association of Scholars acquired, faculty and staff of the university’s program for writing and rhetoric argued that recruiting a ‘BIPOC’ professor—the acronym stands for ‘black, indigenous and people of color’—was vital to the department’s ‘curricular and programmatic goals.’ Faculty at the department of Germanic and Slavic languages and literatures, proposing to hire a German-studies professor, touted the racial diversity of the department’s preferred candidate and explained how she could revise courses on fairy tales, folklore, and fantasy to incorporate ‘critical race studies perspectives.’
The facts are startling. Over the course of years, academic departments competed for funding to bring in new faculty through the FDAP/CNHP program by engaging in blatant race-based discrimination. A key question on the application form of the program specifically asked departments “How will this hire increase the number of underrepresented faculty members in the unit (e.g., US Faculty of Color, women in disciplines where underrepresented)?” A direct affront to anti-discrimination law. The dean of the College of Arts and Sciences was asked at a 2022 faculty meeting how many professors were hired through the program since its inception in 2020—he estimated an astounding 90 percent. Another example cited by Sailer and Galarowicz points to the department of ethnic studies, in which faculty proposed “We have an urgent and qualified need for BIPOC femme/women of color faculty in an Africana Studies focus who will contribute to the social science division thematic cluster hire in racism and racial inequality.”
Sailer and Galarowicz note that “The proposals are remarkable for their candor. It’s also absurd that while referring to the specter of systemic racism, they propose systemic discrimination.” Oh, the irony.
The story out of CU Boulder illustrates the need for serious merit-based reform. The Trump administration is on the right track to end federally funded incentives for DEI programs across the board, but it will take time to undo the years of entrenched influence—especially in higher education. If followed up with formal policy and legislation, alongside internal action by colleges and universities, these Trump initiatives will bring us a step closer to restoring the pursuit of truth and credibility to institutions that have, for too long, picked ideology over excellence.
Until next week.
CounterCurrent is the National Association of Scholars’ weekly newsletter, written by the NAS Staff. To subscribe, update your email preferences here.
Photo by Trump White House Archived on Flickr
0 Comments