
UC sees the good in faculty diversity. Trump's DOJ says it ‘may be' illegal discrimination
The Trump administration said Thursday that it is opening an investigation into UC, alleging that university goals to increase faculty diversity 'may be' illegal sex- and race-based hiring discrimination.
In a brief, 419-word letter to UC President Michael V. Drake, the Justice Department's top civil rights lawyer said it had 'reasonable cause' to believe that UC has 'certain employment practices that discriminate against employees, job applicants, and training program participants based on race and sex.'
The letter pointed to an ambitious UC plan to add at least 20,000 students by 2030 — while increasing graduation rates, the share of students who receive undergraduate diplomas within four years, and access to UC campuses for racial minorities and other minority groups that have historically been underrepresented in higher education. UC announced the plan in 2021 and later increased the enrollment goal to up to 33,000 if enough resources, such as funding, became available.
The Justice Department appeared to zero in on small sections of the extensive 'UC 2030 Capacity Plan' that chart out desires to increase diversity among graduate students and faculty, including adding 1,100 tenure-track faculty.
Harmeet Dhillon, the assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, wrote that the plan may have 'precipitated unlawful action by the University of California and some or all its constituent campuses.'
In a statement, the Justice Department added that UC 'directs its campuses to hire 'diverse' faculty members to meet race- and sex-based employment quotas,' alleging a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Dhillon added: 'It is important to note that we have not reached any conclusions about the subject matter.'
Although the UC goals make clear the university's ambition to increase diversity, they do not stipulate hiring quotas. Since 2020, UC Regents — the governor-appointed board of directors — have also formally banned using quotas based on race and gender. That move came as Californians debated Proposition 16, which would have reversed the state's affirmative action prohibition but failed to pass.
In a statement Thursday, a UC spokesperson said the university abides by the law and would cooperate with the investigation.
'The University of California is committed to fair and lawful processes in all of our programs and activities, consistent with federal and state anti-discrimination laws,' said Senior Director of Strategic and Critical Communications Rachel Zaentz.
'The university also aims to foster a campus environment where everyone is welcomed and supported,' she said. 'We will work in good faith with the Department of Justice as it conducts its investigation.'
The investigation is the second UC hiring probe launched by the Trump administration, part of its aggressive drive to take action against universities it alleges are giving preference to Black, Latino and other racial, ethnic or religious groups over Asian, white and Jewish students, staff and employees. Trump has also ordered an end to diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in education institutions that receive federal funds, resulting in court challenges.
In March, the Justice Department launched an investigation into whether UC 'engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination based on race, religion and national origin against its professors, staff and other employees by allowing an antisemitic hostile work environment to exist on its campuses.'
It was based upon faculty petitions and complaints that accused the university of abetting alleged antisemitism last year during pro-Palestinian encampments calling on UC to divest from financial ties to Israel's war in Gaza.
Both investigations employ a 'pattern or practice' probe of campuses based on federal anti-discrimination law, a method of civil rights enforcement used during Democratic administrations to respond to racism allegations against police departments.
Also in March, the Justice Department accused UCLA, UC Berkeley and UC Irvine of using 'illegal DEI' in admissions, likely referring to affirmative action. The Department of Health and Human Services is also investigating UCLA's medical school over alleged discrimination in admissions.
The university has denied such actions. Zaentz has said UC stopped using race in admissions when Proposition 209 — which bans consideration of race in public education, hiring and contracting — went into effect in 1997. Since then, 'UC has implemented admissions practices to comply with the law,' she said in March.
Two UC campuses — Los Angeles and Berkeley — are on a list of 10 campuses that a federal task force to combat antisemitism has said it is researching. The task force has played a significant role in pulling billions in federal funding from Harvard and Columbia universities over allegations that they promoted antisemitism.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Chicago Tribune
38 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Senators launch a weekend of work to meet Trump's deadline for passing his tax and spending cuts
WASHINGTON — The Senate launched a rare weekend session Saturday as Republicans race to pass President Donald Trump's package of tax breaks, spending cuts and bolstered deportation funds by his July Fourth deadline. Republicans are using their majorities in Congress to push aside Democratic opposition, but they have run into a series of political and policy setbacks. Not all GOP lawmakers are on board with proposals to reduce spending on Medicaid, food stamps and other programs as a way to help cover the cost of extending some $3.8 trillion in Trump tax breaks. The 940-page bill was released shortly before midnight Friday. Senators are expected to grind through the days ahead with procedural vote Saturday to begin considering the legislation, but the timing was uncertain. There would still be a long path ahead, with hours of potentially all-night debate and eventually voting on countless amendments. Senate passage could be days away, and the bill would need to return to the House for a final round of votes before it could reach the White House. Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, opened the day's session with an impassioned defense of the package that he said has been misrepresented by its critics. 'Here's what American workers get out of 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' Moreno said as he began outlining the provisions. 'Read it for yourself.' The weekend session could be a make-or-break moment for Trump's party, which has invested much of its political capital on his signature domestic policy plan. Trump is pushing Congress to wrap it up, even as he sometimes gives mixed signals, allowing for more time. At recent events at the White House, including Friday, Trump has admonished the 'grandstanders' among GOP holdouts to fall in line. 'We can get it done,' Trump said in a social media post. 'It will be a wonderful Celebration for our Country.' The legislation is an ambitious but complicated series of GOP priorities. At its core, it would make permanent many of the tax breaks from Trump's first term that would otherwise expire by year's end if Congress fails to act, resulting in a potential tax increase on Americans. The bill would add new breaks, including no taxes on tips, and commit $350 billion to national security, including for Trump's mass deportation agenda. But the spending cuts that Republicans are relying on to offset the lost tax revenues are causing dissent within the GOP ranks. Some lawmakers say the cuts go too far, particularly for people receiving health care through Medicaid. Meanwhile, conservatives, worried about the nation's debt, are pushing for steeper cuts. Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., said he remains concerned about the fundamentals of the package and will not support the procedural motion to begin debate. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., pushing for deeper cuts, said he needed to see the final legislative text. With the narrow Republicans majorities in the House and Senate, leaders need almost every lawmaker on board to ensure passage. The release of that draft had been delayed as the Senate parliamentarian reviewed the bill to ensure it complied with the chamber's strict 'Byrd Rule,' named for the late Sen. Robert C. Byrd, It largely bars policy matters from inclusion in budget bills unless a provision can get 60 votes to overcome objections. That would be a tall order in a Senate with a 53-47 GOP edge and Democrats unified against Trump's bill. Republicans suffered a series of setbacks after several proposals were determined to be out of compliance by the chief arbiter of the Senate's rules. One plan would have shifted some food stamp costs from the federal government to the states; a second would have gutted the funding structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. But over the past days, Republicans have quickly revised those proposals and reinstated them. The final text includes a proposal for cuts to a Medicaid provider tax that had run into parliamentary objections and opposition from several senators worried about the fate of rural hospitals. The new version extends the start date for those cuts and establishes a $25 billion fund to aid rural hospitals and providers. Most states impose the provider tax as a way to boost federal Medicaid reimbursements. Some Republicans argue that is a scam and should be abolished. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has said that under the House-passed version of the bill, some 10.9 million more people would go without health care and at least 3 million fewer would qualify for food aid. The CBO has not yet publicly assessed the Senate draft, which proposes steeper reductions. Top income-earners would see about a $12,000 tax cut under the House bill, while the package would cost the poorest Americans $1,600, the CBO said. The Senate included a compromise over the so-called SALT provision, a deduction for state and local taxes that has been a top priority of lawmakers from New York and other high-tax states, but the issue remains unsettled. The current SALT cap is $10,000 a year, and a handful of Republicans wanted to boost it to $40,000 a year. The final draft includes a $40,000 cap, but for five years instead of 10. Many Republican senators say that is still too generous. At least one House GOP holdout, Rep. Nick LaLota of New York, had said that would be insufficient. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Republicans dropped the bill 'in the dead of night' and are rushing to finish the bill before the public fully knows what's in it. House Speaker Mike Johnson, who sent his colleagues home for the weekend with plans to be on call to return to Washington, had said they are 'very close' to finishing up. 'We would still like to meet that July Fourth, self-imposed deadline,' said Johnson, R-La. Johnson and Thune have stayed close to the White House, relying on Trump to pressure holdout lawmakers.
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
This overlooked risk to financial markets usually lurks quietly under the surface. But now it's ‘shouting, not whispering'
Much attention has been focused on the U.S. current account deficit, or the imbalance between imports and export, but there's another metric that's poised to amplify market shocks. That's the net international investment position, according to Kevin Ford, FX and macro strategist at Convera, who likens it to America's financial scorecard with the rest of the world. President Donald Trump's trade war has focused much of Wall Street's attention on the U.S. current account deficit, or the imbalance between imports and exports. But there's another metric worth following that could worsen financial risks. According to Kevin Ford, FX and macro strategist at Convera, the country's net international investment position (NIIP) often gets overlooked. It measures how much the U.S. owns abroad versus how much the world owns in the U.S., he said in a note last week, describing it as America's financial scorecard with the rest of the world. And by that score, the U.S. is in the red by about $26 trillion, or nearly 80% of GDP. 'That means foreign investors hold way more American assets than Americans hold abroad,' Ford added. 'It's a setup that works fine when confidence is high, but in shaky times like 2025, it can become a pressure cooker.' Indeed, times have been shaky. The U.S. Dollar Index is down 10% so far this year as the shock of Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariffs continues to reverberate, creating doubts about U.S. assets once deemed reliable safe havens. In fact, the dollar's year-to-date plunge is the worst since the U.S. transitioned to a free-floating exchange rate in 1973, effectively ending the post-World War II system of fixed rates under the Bretton Woods agreement. Meanwhile, legislation that would add trillions of dollars to fiscal deficits is advancing in Congress, stirring more anxiety among foreign investors, especially those who hold U.S. debt. Put it all together, and this year has been a textbook example of how a negative NIIP profile can magnify currency turmoil, Ford warned. 'And because so much of the capital propping up the U.S. financial system comes from abroad, even small shifts in sentiment can lead to big outflows,' he added. 'That's a lot of dollars being sold, and fewer being bought, and voilà, the greenback stumbles.' Circling back to the financial scorecard analogy, Ford explained that the problem with focusing on the current account deficit is that it only shows the flow of transactions, i.e. imports versus exports. By contrast, the NIIP shows the overall pile of debts—and ignoring that would be like judging a person's spending habits without checking their credit card balance, he said, making trust 'your most important asset.' 'Yes, trade deficits, interest rates, and Fed signals all play a role, but the NIIP tells you just how exposed the U.S. is when things go sideways,' Ford concluded. 'It's the quiet structural risk lurking under the surface, ready to amplify shocks. And in a year like this, it's been shouting, not whispering.' Waning confidence in the dollar has spurred investors and central banks around the world to load up on gold, which has soared in price in recent years and particularly this year, surging 21% in 2025. Trump's unrelenting pressure on Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell to cut interest rates has also weakened the dollar lately. While many on Wall Street see even more downside potential ahead for the dollar, the AI boom that's still drawing billions in global investment flows to the U.S. offers some hope for relief. This story was originally featured on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data


Politico
44 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump pollster warns Senate GOP against deeper Medicaid cuts
Senate Republicans released updated megabill text late Friday that would make sharp cuts to the Inflation Reduction Act's solar and wind tax credits after a late-stage push by President Donald Trump to crack down further on the incentives. The text would require solar and wind generation projects seeking to qualify for the law's clean electricity production and investment tax credits to be placed in service by the end of 2027 — significantly more restrictive than an earlier proposal by the Senate Finance Committee that tied eligibility to when a project begins construction. The changes came after Trump urged Senate Majority Leader John Thune to crack down on the wind and solar credits and align the measure more closely with reconciliation text, H.R.1, that passed the House, as POLITICO reported earlier on Friday. The changes are likely to put some moderate GOP senators, who have backed a slower schedule for sunsetting those incentives, in a tough position. They'll be forced to choose between rejecting Trump's agenda or allowing the gutting of tax credits that could lead to canceled projects and job losses in their states — something renewable energy advocates are also warning about. 'We are literally going to have not enough electricity because Trump is killing solar. It's that serious,' Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) responded on X early Saturday. 'We need a bunch of new power on the grid, and nothing is as available as solar. Everything else takes a while. Meantime, expect shortages and high prices. Stupid.' The revised text would retain the investment and production tax credits for baseload sources, such as nuclear, geothermal, hydropower or energy storage, as proposed in the Finance Committee's earlier proposal. But it would make other significant changes, including extending a tax credit for clean hydrogen production until 2028. The panel's earlier proposal would have eliminated the credit after this year. And despite vocal lobbying by the solar industry, the proposal would maintain an abrupt cut to the tax incentive supporting residential solar power. The committee's earlier proposal would have eliminated that credit six months after the enactment of the bill; now the updated draft proposes repealing it at the end of this year. It would also deny certain wind and solar leasing arrangements from accessing the climate law's clean electricity investment and production tax credits, but, in a notable change, removed earlier language specifically disallowing rooftop solar. And it would move up the timeline for certain rules barring foreign entities of concern from accessing those credits. The bill would move up the termination date for electric vehicle tax credits to Sept. 30, compared to six months after enactment in the earlier Finance text. The credit for EV chargers would extend through June 2026. The new text also provides a bonus incentive for advanced nuclear facilities built in communities with high levels of employment in the nuclear industry. And the bill makes metallurgical coal eligible for the advanced manufacturing production tax credit through 2029. Sam Ricketts, co-founder of S2 Strategies, a clean energy policy consulting group, said the new draft is going to 'screw' ratepayers, kill jobs and undermine U.S. economic competitiveness. 'All just to give fossil fuel executives more profits,' he said. 'Or to own the libs. Insanity.' Josh Siegel contributed to this report.