US Justice Department opens inquiry into University of California hiring practices
The University of California plans to build a university system that more closely reflects the state's racial and ethnic diversity. PHOTO: ALISHA JUCEVIC/NYTIMES
WASHINGTON – The Trump administration on June 26 targeted California's education system for the second time in two days, announcing a new Justice Department investigation into whether a plan to build a university system that more closely reflects the state's racial and ethnic diversity violates civil rights laws against discrimination.
The investigation was made public just 24 hours after the US Education Department declared that California was breaking federal law by allowing transgender girls to compete on female sports teams. The federal government gave the state 10 days to reverse its policies or face 'imminent enforcement action'.
On June 26, the Justice Department's top civil rights attorney Harmeet Dhillon said in a letter to Michael V. Drake, president of the University of California system, that she was focused on the 'University of California 2030 Capacity Plan,' which she said might discriminate against some employees, job applicants and training programme participants.
The government's news release about the inquiry said that the university plan required campuses to meet quotas for race- and sex-based employment.
The 44-page plan is a three-year-old planning document aimed at expanding enrolment in the University of California system while also 'reflecting California's diversity'. It makes no specific mention of quotas, but does note that future growth of faculty and students should result in campus populations that 'better reflect and tap the talent of underrepresented populations who represent the majority of Californians'.
The plan offers parameters on how to achieve that while also meeting Governor Gavin Newsom's goal of 70 per cent of working-age Californians earning post-secondary degrees or certificates by 2030.
One goal includes ramping up recruitment efforts so that, by 2030, more than 40 per cent of the University of California system's doctoral students would come from University of California and California State University undergraduate campuses that are diverse enough that the federal government has designated them as 'minority-serving institutions'. Graduates from historically Black colleges and universities and tribal colleges and universities would also count toward that 40 per cent goal.
'We recognise the demand for a UC education is great,' Dr Drake and the university system's 10 chancellors wrote in the introduction of the plan. 'And we know the university needs to tap the talent of students across our state, increasing educational attainment levels and economic opportunities for Californians who have not had the same access to our university in the past.'
Ms Rachel Zaentz, a spokesperson for the University of California, said the school would 'work in good faith' with Justice Department investigators.
'The University of California is committed to fair and lawful processes in all of our programmes and activities, consistent with federal and state anti-discrimination laws,' Ms Zaentz said.
Since President Donald Trump took office, California has had to contend with multiple threats from his administration to withhold federal funding.
The federal targeting of the state education systems also comes as the administration ramps up efforts to realign the political balance of higher education, which the administration views as hostile to conservatives. It has opened investigations into civil rights, foreign funding and other issues at Columbia University, Harvard University and other elite colleges.
The Justice Department said in March that it was investigating whether several California universities were complying with the Supreme Court's 2023 decision banning the consideration of race in admissions. That investigation targeted Stanford University but also three schools in the University of California system – Berkeley, Los Angeles and Irvine.
California public colleges and universities have been prohibited by state law from using affirmative action in college admissions since 1996. NYTIMES
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNA
an hour ago
- CNA
Iran holds state funeral for top brass slain in war with Israel
TEHRAN: Iran held a state funeral service on Saturday (Jun 28) for around 60 people, including its military commanders, killed in its war with Israel, after Tehran's top diplomat condemned Donald Trump's comments on supreme leader Ali Khamenei as "unacceptable". The proceedings started at 8am local time (0430 GMT) in the capital Tehran as government offices and many businesses were closed on Saturday for the occasion. "The ceremony to honour the martyrs has officially started," state TV said, showing footage of people donning black clothes, waving Iranian flags and holding pictures of the slain military commanders. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, as well as other senior government officials, also attended the event. Images showed coffins draped in Iranian flags and bearing portraits of the deceased commanders in uniform near Enghelab Square in central Tehran. The United States had carried out strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites last weekend, joining its ally Israel's bombardments of Iran's nuclear programme in the 12-day conflict launched on Jun 13. Both Israel and Iran claimed victory in the war that ended with a ceasefire, with Iranian leader Khamenei downplaying the US strikes as having done "nothing significant". In a tirade on his Truth Social platform, Trump blasted Tehran on Friday for claiming to have won the war. He also claimed to have known "EXACTLY where he (Khamenei) was sheltered, and would not let Israel, or the U.S. Armed Forces... terminate his life". "I SAVED HIM FROM A VERY UGLY AND IGNOMINIOUS DEATH, and he does not have to say, 'THANK YOU, PRESIDENT TRUMP!'" the US leader said. Trump added he had been working in recent days on the possible removal of sanctions against Iran, one of Tehran's main demands. "But no, instead I get hit with a statement of anger, hatred, and disgust, and immediately dropped all work on sanction relief, and more," Trump said. Hitting back at Trump Saturday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi condemned the Republican president's comments on Khamenei. "If President Trump is genuine about wanting a deal, he should put aside the disrespectful and unacceptable tone towards Iran's Supreme Leader, Grand Ayatollah Khamenei," Araghchi posted on social media platform X. "The Great and Powerful Iranian People, who showed the world that the Israeli regime had NO CHOICE but to RUN to 'Daddy' to avoid being flattened by our Missiles, do not take kindly to Threats and Insults." The Israeli strikes on Iran killed at least 627 civilians, Tehran's health ministry said. Iran's attacks on Israel killed 28 people, according to Israeli figures. "HISTORIC" STATE FUNERAL The ceremony in Tehran "to honour the martyrs" will be followed by a funeral procession to Azadi Square, about 11km across the sprawling metropolis. Mohsen Mahmoudi, head of Tehran's Islamic Development Coordination Council, vowed it would be a "historic day for Islamic Iran and the revolution". Among the dead is Mohammad Bagheri, a major general in Iran's Revolutionary Guards and the second-in-command of the armed forces after the Iranian leader. He will be buried alongside his wife and daughter, a journalist for a local media outlet, all killed in an Israeli attack. Nuclear scientist Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi, also killed in the attacks, will be buried with his wife. Revolutionary Guards commander Hossein Salami, who was killed on the first day of the war, will also be laid to rest after Saturday's ceremony -- which will also honour at least 30 other top commanders. Of the 60 people who are to be laid to rest after the ceremony, four are children. "IMMINENT THREAT" During his first term in office, Trump pulled out in 2018 of a landmark nuclear deal -- negotiated by former US president Barack Obama. The deal that Trump had abandoned aimed to make it practically impossible for Iran to build an atomic bomb, while at the same time allowing it to pursue a civil nuclear programme. Iran, which insists its nuclear programme is only for civilian purposes, stepped up its activities after Trump withdrew from the agreement. After the US strikes, Trump said negotiations for a new deal were set to begin next week. But Tehran denied a resumption, and leader Khamenei said Trump had "exaggerated events in unusual ways", rejecting US claims Iran's nuclear programme had been set back by decades. Israel had claimed it had "thwarted Iran's nuclear project" during the 12-day war. But its foreign minister reiterated on Friday that the world was obliged to stop Tehran from developing an atomic bomb. "The international community now has an obligation to prevent, through any effective means, the world's most extreme regime from obtaining the most dangerous weapon," Gideon Saar wrote on X.
AsiaOne
2 hours ago
- AsiaOne
Trump dismisses reports US is weighing up to $38 billion civilian nuclear deal for Iran, World News
WASHINGTON - US President Donald Trump on Friday (June 27) dismissed media reports that said his administration had discussed possibly helping Iran access as much as $30 billion (S$38 billion) to build a civilian-energy-producing nuclear programme. CNN reported on Thursday and NBC News reported on Friday that the Trump administration in recent days had explored possible economic incentives for Iran in return for its government halting uranium enrichment. The reports cited sources. CNN cited officials as saying that several proposals were floated and were preliminary. "Who in the Fake News Media is the SleazeBag saying that 'President Trump wants to give Iran $30 Billion to build non-military Nuclear facilities.' Never heard of this ridiculous idea," Trump wrote on Truth Social late on Friday, calling the reports a "Hoax." Since April, Iran and the US have held indirect talks aimed at finding a new diplomatic solution regarding Iran's nuclear programme. Tehran says its programme is peaceful and Washington says it wants to ensure Iran cannot build a nuclear weapon. Trump, earlier this week, announced a ceasefire between US ally Israel and its regional rival Iran to halt a war that began on June 13 when Israel attacked Iran. The Israel-Iran conflict had raised alarms in a region already on edge since the start of Israel's war in Gaza in October 2023. The US struck Iran's nuclear sites over the last weekend and Iran targeted a US base in Qatar on Monday in retaliation, before Trump announced the ceasefire. [[nid:719354]] Israel is the only Middle Eastern country widely believed to have nuclear weapons and said its war against Iran aimed to prevent Tehran from developing its own nuclear weapons. Iran is a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, while Israel is not. The UN nuclear watchdog, which carries out inspections in Iran, has said it has "no credible indication" of an active, coordinated weapons programme in Iran.
Straits Times
2 hours ago
- Straits Times
Trump victorious again as US Supreme Court wraps up its term
Mr Trump has scored a series of victories at the Supreme Court since returning to office in January. PHOTO: REUTERS Trump victorious again as US Supreme Court wraps up its term WASHINGTON - The US Supreme Court on the last day of rulings for its current term gave Donald Trump his latest in a series of victories at the nation's top judicial body, one that may make it easier for him to implement contentious elements of his sweeping agenda as he tests the limits of presidential power. With its six conservative members in the majority and its three liberals dissenting, the court on Jan 27 curbed the ability of judges to impede his policies nationwide, resetting the power balance between the federal judiciary and presidents. The ruling came after the Republican president's administration asked the Supreme Court to narrow the scope of so-called 'universal' injunctions issued by three federal judges that halted nationally the enforcement of his January executive order limiting birthright citizenship. The court's decision has 'systematically weakened judicial oversight and strengthened executive discretion,' said Mr Paul Rosenzweig, an attorney who served in Republican President George W. Bush's administration. June 27's ruling said that judges generally can grant relief only to the individuals or groups who brought a particular lawsuit. The decision did not, however, permit immediate implementation of Mr Trump's directive, instead instructing lower courts to reconsider the scope of the injunctions. The ruling was authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, one of three conservative justices who Mr Trump appointed during his first term in office from 2017 to 2021. Mr Trump has scored a series of victories at the Supreme Court since returning to office in January. These have included clearing the way for his administration to resume deporting migrants to countries other than their own without offering them a chance to show the harms they could face and ending temporary legal status held by hundreds of thousands of migrants on humanitarian grounds. The court also permitted implementation of Mr Trump's ban on transgender people in the military, let his administration withhold payment to foreign aid groups for work already performed for the government, allowed his firing of two Democratic members of federal labor boards to stand for now, and backed his Department of Government Efficiency in two disputes. 'President Trump secured the relief he sought in most of his administration's cases,' Mr George Mason University law school professor Robert Luther III said. 'Justice Barrett's opinion is a win for the presidency,' Mr Luther said of the decision on nationwide injunctions. 'It recognises that the executive branch is a bully pulpit with a wide range of authorities to implement the promises of a campaign platform.' Once again, as with many of the term's major decisions, the three liberal justices found themselves in dissent, a familiar position as the court under the guidance of Chief Justice John Roberts continues to shift American law rightward. The rulings in favour of Mr Trump illustrate that "the court's three most liberal justices are proving less relevant now than at any earlier point in the Roberts Court with respect to their impact on its jurisprudence," Mr Luther said. The cases involving Mr Trump administration policies this year came to the court as emergency filings rather than through the normal process, with oral arguments held only in the birthright litigation. And those arguments did not focus on the legality of Mr Trump's action but rather on the actions of the judges who found that it was likely unconstitutional. 'One theme is the court's struggle to keep pace with a faster-moving legal world, especially as the Trump administration tests the outer boundaries of its powers,' Boston College Law School professor Daniel Lyons said. In other cases during the nine-month term, the court sided with a Republican-backed ban in Tennessee on gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, endorsed South Carolina's plan to cut off public funding to reproductive healthcare and abortion provider Planned Parenthood, and made it easier to pursue claims alleging workplace 'reverse' discrimination. The court also spared two American gun companies from the Mexican government's lawsuit accusing them of aiding illegal firearms trafficking to drug cartels, and allowed parents to opt elementary school children out of classes when storybooks with LGBT characters are read. In several cases involving federal statutes, the message from the justices is that people unhappy with the outcome need to take that up with Congress, according to Loyola Law School professor Jessica Levinson. 'The court is implicitly saying, 'That's Congress' problem to fix, and it's not the court's role to solve those issues,'' Mr Levinson said. This is the second straight year that the court ended its term with a decision handing Mr Trump a major victory. On July 1, 2024, it ruled in favour of Mr Trump in deciding that presidents cannot be prosecuted for official actions taken in office. It marked the first time that the court recognised any form of presidential immunity from prosecution. The Supreme Court's next term begins in October but Trump's administration still has some emergency requests pending that the justices could act upon at any time. It has asked the court to halt a judicial order blocking mass federal job cuts and the restructuring of agencies. It also has asked the justices to rein in the judge handling a case involving deportations to so-called 'third countries.' Recent rulings 'have really shown the court for what it is, which is a deeply conservative court,' Georgia State University law professor Anthony Michael Kreis said. The court's jurisprudence reflects a larger shift in the national discourse, with Republicans feeling they have the political capital to achieve long-sought aims, Kreis said. The court's conservative majority, Mr Kreis said, 'is probably feeling more emboldened to act.' REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
