The U.S. Department of Education has issued a directive to colleges and schools, mandating the elimination of race-specific programs, including financial aid and racially themed dormitory floors and graduation ceremonies, by the end of the month, or face the loss of federal funding. This announcement has sent educators scrambling to understand the implications of the new guidelines, which extend beyond admissions practices previously deemed illegal by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The "dear colleague" letter, signed by Craig Trainor, the acting assistant secretary for civil rights, outlines a new federal policy on anti-discrimination that affects all aspects of educational institutions. It emphasizes that any use of race in decisions related to admissions, hiring, promotions, financial aid, and other areas is in violation of anti-discrimination laws, particularly following the Supreme Court’s recent ruling against affirmative action.
The letter highlights that the department will not tolerate any form of racial discrimination within educational institutions, explicitly mentioning that white and Asian students, including those from disadvantaged backgrounds, are often victims of such practices. However, it does not address other types of programming aimed at non-racial groups, such as initiatives for women or LGBTQ+ students.
California, which received approximately $16.3 billion in federal funding for its K-12 public school system last year, is particularly affected by these changes. The guidelines do not clarify whether funding from other sources is also at risk, leaving many institutions uncertain about their financial future.
Experts in education and law have expressed concern that the new guidance not only targets admissions and hiring practices but also aims to dismantle programs that support under-represented racial minorities, such as culturally themed dorm floors and optional graduation ceremonies for various ethnic groups. The letter described such graduation events as "shameful."
Shaun Harper, a professor at the University of Southern California, criticized the letter as a significant shift from the civil rights enforcement approach under the previous administration, suggesting it could create a chilling effect on educational institutions. He questioned the legal basis of the Department of Education’s interpretation, arguing that the Supreme Court ruling did not prohibit all race-conscious programs but specifically addressed their use in admissions.
In California, Proposition 209, enacted in 1996, already prohibits public educational institutions from considering race in admissions, which means that many institutions, including the University of California system, claim compliance with these new federal guidelines. However, they still maintain programs that support racial and ethnic communities, which may now come under scrutiny.
The University of California stated that it is not concerned about violating the new federal guidance, asserting its adherence to Proposition 209 and the absence of race-based preferences in its practices. Meanwhile, the California State University system and private institutions like USC and Stanford have not yet publicly commented on the implications of the letter.
The department’s notice has sparked fears of a broader crackdown on diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in education, with experts suggesting that the letter serves as a precursor to potential legal challenges against institutions that maintain race-conscious policies. Edward Blum, founder of the Students for Fair Admissions, indicated that the letter could lead to a series of directives targeting what the department may deem discriminatory practices.
As educational institutions grapple with these new requirements, the future of race-specific programs remains uncertain, with many fearing that the push for inclusivity could be severely undermined.