Despite Trump's order, a surprising number of DEI programs remain 'active' at colleges and universities
Defending Education, formerly known as Parents Defending Education, is a nationwide grassroots organization that works to "fight indoctrination in classrooms and on campus to promote the reestablishment of a quality, non-political education for all students."
In addition to tracking those DEI offices and programs that are still active, the group's investigation also highlighted that Defending Education uncovered dozens of schools that have taken steps to rebrand or reorganize their DEI efforts, as opposed to shutting them down like others have done.
At least 27 universities, colleges or schools within such institutions have taken steps to do this, according to the investigation. Meanwhile, in "a few cases," schools have moved their online DEI resources behind password-protected web pages, Defending Education also pointed out.
"DEI evangelists at federally funded institutions are hiding race discrimination in an effort to violate federal law and think they won't be found out. But our latest report demonstrates they already have been," said Sarah Parshall Perry, Defending Education Vice President and Legal Fellow, who has extensive legal experience in the higher education realm. "Despite a very clear directive from the White House to end 'DEI' practices, too many institutions of higher education have simply sent their discrimination underground by renaming or reorganizing race-based initiatives and DEI offices."
Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC) is an example of one of the universities that has been accused of attempting to hide their DEI resources.
In response to the accusations, a VUMC spokesperson told Fox News Digital at the time that it was undergoing "a thorough review" of its programs to figure out "where revisions may be required to remain in compliance, including updating information on websites and other public platforms."
However, today, offices such as the Office of Health Equity, the Office of Diversity and Inclusion, and the Office for Diversity Affairs are seemingly still active, according to Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn.
The White House blasted some of the nation's premier universities for "egregious illegal behavior," after Harvard refused to comply with Trump administration demands related to ending their DEI programs. Amid Harvard's refusal to comply, the administration revealed this week that it would freeze more than $2 billion in federal funding for the institution.
During a press briefing this week, when asked why federal funding was so available to premier Ivy League institutions like Harvard, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said it was a question President Donald Trump frequently ponders himself.
"It's a question the president has obviously raised in his discussions," Leavitt said. "I think a lot of Americans are wondering why their tax dollars are going to these universities when they are not only indoctrinating our nation's students, but also allowing such egregious illegal behavior to occur."
Perry told Fox News Digital that Defending Education will not stop looking for "discrimination" in higher education, in an effort to make the guarantee of a "colorblind education" for every American student a reality "once and for all."
Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for comment but did not hear back by time of publication.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wall Street Journal
2 hours ago
- Wall Street Journal
Even If Harvard Wins This Court Case, the Trump Fight Won't Go Away
Harvard's odds to win its Boston court battle look favorable—but the larger war is up in the air. Legal analysts say Harvard has a strong case in arguing that the U.S. government improperly cut $2.2 billion in federal funding from the Ivy League school. The federal district judge presiding over a key hearing Monday appeared skeptical of the government's arguments.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
IMF says No. 2 official, Gopinath, leaving at end-August to return to Harvard
By Andrea Shalal and David Lawder WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Gita Gopinath, the No. 2 official at the International Monetary Fund, will leave her post at the end of August to return to Harvard University, the IMF said in a statement on Monday. IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva will name a successor to Gopinath in "due course," the IMF said. Gopinath joined the fund in 2019 as chief economist - the first woman to serve in that role - and was promoted to first deputy managing director in January 2022. No comment was immediately available from the U.S. Treasury, which manages the dominant U.S. shareholding in the IMF. While European countries have traditionally chosen the Fund's managing director, the U.S. Treasury has traditionally recommended candidates for the first deputy managing director role. Gopinath is an Indian-born U.S. citizen. The timing of the move caught some IMF insiders by surprise, and appears to have been initiated by Gopinath. Gopinath, who had left Harvard to join the IMF, will return to the university as a professor of economics. Gopinath's departure will offer Treasury a chance to recommend a successor at a time when U.S. President Donald Trump is seeking to restructure the global economy and end longstanding U.S. trade deficits with high tariffs on imports from nearly all countries. She will return to a university that has been in the Trump administration's crosshairs after it rejected demands to change its governance, hiring, and admissions practices. Georgieva said Gopinath joined the IMF as a highly respected academic and proved to be an "exceptional intellectual leader" during her time, which included the pandemic and global shocks caused by Russia's invasion of Ukraine. "Gita steered the Fund's analytical and policy work with clarity, striving for the highest standards of rigorous analysis at a complex time of high uncertainty and rapidly changing global economic environment," Georgieva said. Gopinath has also overseen the fund's multilateral surveillance and analytical work on fiscal and monetary policy, debt, and international trade. Gopinath said she was grateful for a "once in a lifetime opportunity" to work at the IMF, thanking both Georgieva and the previous IMF chief, Christine Lagarde, who appointed her as chief economist. "I now return to my roots in academia, where I look forward to continuing to push the research frontier in international finance and macroeconomics to address global challenges, and to training the next generation of economists," she said in a statement. Solve the daily Crossword
Boston Globe
4 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Judge in Harvard funding lawsuit calls Trump administration's arguments ‘a bit mind-boggling'
Advertisement Harvard alumni rally outside a Boston court where Harvard University will argue against the Trump administration's funding cuts 'The consequences for that in terms of constitutional law are staggering,' Burroughs said. Harvard has argued the Trump administration violated its constitutional rights and that the cuts are a significant blow to critical scientific research. Michael Velchik, a Department of Justice attorney appearing on behalf of the government, argued that the government has the right to cancel Harvard's grants because of its determination that Harvard has failed to root out antisemitism on campus, which he said is a priority of the Trump administration. 'Harvard claims the government is anti-Harvard. I reject that,' Velchik said. 'The government is pro-Jewish students at Harvard. The government is pro-Jewish faculty at Harvard.' Burroughs, who said she is Jewish and agreed that there were some missteps on campus, pressed Velchik to connect the concerns about antisemitism with the cancellation of funds and why the administration could make wholesale cuts instead of making decisions grant-by-grant. Advertisement After Harvard publicly resisted the Trump administration's demands in April, The case has enormous consequences not just for Harvard — the university says the Steven Lehotsky, a lawyer representing Harvard, argued Monday that the government's termination of the university's research grants violated Harvard's First Amendment rights. He pointed to the Trump administration's Lehotsky said that the case is 'about the federal government's control over the inner-workings of America's oldest institution of higher education.' Harvard has also argued that the Trump administration skirted a legal process to cancel funding under Title VI of the Civil Rights of 1964, which prohibits discrimination 'on the basis of race, color, or national origin.' Lehotsky at one point quoted 'Sentence first—verdict afterwards,' a line from the Queen of Hearts in the book 'Alice's Adventures in Wonderland,' to illustrate how he believes the government took action before legally justifying its decisions. Advertisement The Trump administration knew that process was available to try and cancel funds, but chose not to follow it. Velchik, meanwhile, said that the government was not using the Title VI process in this case and argued that the administration had the authority under federal regulations regarding grants. Because of that, Velchik argued that the case should be tried in federal claims court as opposed to federal district court, which Burroughs sharply questioned. Burroughs is a familiar face for Harvard. She is presiding over the university's other high-profile case against the Trump administration, which challenges the government's efforts to bar Harvard from hosting international students. Burroughs has blocked those efforts until the case is decided, and the government has The judge also In a post on his social media network Truth Social, President Trump said Monday that Burroughs is 'a TOTAL DISASTER' and an 'automatic 'loss' for the People of our Country,' an example of Trump's Advertisement On Monday, Burroughs also heard from lawyers representing As the hearing wrapped up around noon, dozens of Harvard students, faculty, and alumni gathered outside of the John Joseph Moakley Courthouse in support of the university and its researchers. The rally was organized by the Crimson Courage, a group of Harvard alumni that has called on Harvard to Community organizer and Harvard alumnus Lew Finfer, who helped coordinate the protest, said the funding cuts not only have disastrous consequences for scientific research, but also for families whose lives were directly impacted by studies focused on cancer, Alzheimer's, and other diseases. 'Having family ... who have had cancer and died of cancer and have Alzheimer's, the fact that people are trying to do something about it — [the research] always feels personal, as it would to anyone if they heard heard about these things," Lew said. 'It's not just research,' Finfer added. It's people's lives.' James McAffrey, 22, a Harvard undergraduate who co-founded Advertisement 'I haven't had research funding cut. I'm not at risk of being deported,' he said Monday. 'Which is why I feel even more committed to speaking out … because there's so many of my peers that can't say what they think and that's not right in an America built on freedom of speech.' Aidan Ryan can be reached at
