DEI Won’t Die Easily
One might think that revamping a website would be an easy start to complying with the Board of Visitors’ order to dismantle the Division for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) at the University of Virginia. Retitle the home page. Put up an “Under Construction” logo. Post a statement indicating that changes are coming. Do something!
But a full week after the Board’s unanimous vote, the website still stands, as if nothing had changed. The home page still proclaims the DEI division’s mission, highlights DEI initiatives, and links to DEI-related web pages. To all outward appearances, everything continues as before. George Mason University has managed to scrub its website of DEI references in conformity with a Trump administration executive order, but UVA has not.
The website is symbolic of the challenge the Board of Visitors faces in carrying out its order. DEI most definitely is not “dead,” as Governor Youngkin prematurely proclaimed earlier this week on Fox News.
The Board resolution is often vague; there is no clear definition of what constitutes “DEI,” an amorphous concept that can be interpreted in many ways. The UVA leaders charged with enacting the sweeping changes are the very same people who erected the DEI system, the influence of which extends into every nook and cranny of the institution. Disentangling racial preferences from admissions, hiring, promotions, scholarships, discipline, and other aspects of university life will be a complex and delicate task. Meanwhile, outright resistance can be expected from faculty members, a few of whom have already spoken out.
The Board resolution required President Jim Ryan to report back on his progress within 30 days. Don’t expect much. The mandate is mission impossible, even for someone who shares the Board’s goals. The task likely will take 30 months… if not longer.
The Board of Visitors resolution argued that DEI as practiced at UVA conflicted with the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and other federal civil rights laws, and it ordered the University to comply with the Trump administration’s executive order and follow-up “Dear Colleague Letter” on the topic.
Specifically, the Board ordered UVA to:
“dissolve” the Division of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion & Community Partnerships, and transfer permissible functions such as the federally mandated Office of Equal Opportunity and Civil Rights to other divisions.
ensure that UVA policies and practices across the board comply with federal law.
block subterfuges to preserve DEI and racial preferences by “indirect means” such as using proxies for race in admissions, or running programs through third-party contractors.
While some Board members enthusiastically endorsed the measures, others went along only because their fiduciary duty obligated them to protect UVA from the threatened cut-off of hundreds of millions of dollars of federal funds.
Youngkin lost no time, though, in declaring victory. On Fox News, he proclaimed, “DEI is done” at UVA.
Youngkin’s claim earned plaudits and recognition in national media, not just conservative blogs but such august outlets as the Wall Street Journal.
Some problems with the BoV resolution were immediately apparent, however. The University’s DEI office is paralleled by DEI offices in the College of Arts & Sciences, the business schools, the law school, the engineering school, the medical school, and all the rest (12 in all). The resolution leaves them untouched. In theory, that obvious oversight can be easily corrected with a follow-up board vote.
But the resolution provides the Ryan administration a big loophole — “permissible” programs can be transferred to other departments in the vast UVA bureaucracy. Who defines which programs are “permissible”? Who decides whether programs enshrine racial preferences in violation of the Trump administration’s interpretation of federal law?
The Board resolution prohibits the use of workarounds such as relabeling a program to delete any references to DEI while preserving the DEI substance. But there’s always gray area. Who decides whether a tweak conforms to the Trump administration standards or violates them?
In a message to the UVA community, Ryan indicated Tuesday that “we” would take a look at the functions of the DEI office and determine where they should be housed.
Over the past month or so, he added, “we” have been reviewing policies and practices to make sure they do not run afoul of any federal or state anti-discrimination laws. “Those conversations will continue with a focus on ensuring we are complying with the law and doing the very best work we can.”
Who does he mean by “we”? Administrative staff? Select faculty members? Does the “we” include anyone who shares a healthy skepticism of DEI and racial preferences or only those who have championed the programs over the years?
Does anyone doubt that these deliberations will engage in the Jesuitical parsing of words over just what constitutes “diversity,” “equity,” “inclusion,” and “racial preferences,” and that “permissible” status will be conferred liberally?
Internal resistance has not had time to organize yet but organize it will. Pressure on Ryan from internal UVA constituencies will mount.
Mere days after the Board vote, religion professor Ashon Crawley fired an opening salvo under the letterhead of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP). He described Youngkin’s celebration of the end of DEI as curious and contradictory. “Somehow he would both encourage diversity and then dismiss it as an obstacle to overcome.”
Regarding the Governor’s invocation of Thomas Jefferson’s dictum that all men are created equal, Crawley asked, “What values are those? … The theft of, ownership over, and building of wealth through enslaved labor? The ongoing sexual violence against Sally Hemings?”
“Instead of abolishing DEI, I along with many other scholars of race, gender, sexuality and history — and so many of us that pay attention to what happens in our world and its continued violence against marginalized people — think DEI initiatives do not go far enough in terms of alleviating suffering or creating a more just world.
Foes of “supremacy” in any guise, he vowed, “will fight.”
Many faculty members at UVA think like Crawley. Indeed, many were recruited during Ryan’s tenure.
Ryan’s views may not be as extreme as Crawley’s. But does anyone think that the UVA president, having spent the past seven years erecting the edifice of “Inclusive Excellence” and institutionalizing Racial Equity Task Force recommendations calling for roughly $950 million to rectify historical wrongs, will enthusiastically embrace the shutdown of his life’s work? Does anyone seriously think he will not bend every effort to preserve what he can through relabeling, rebranding, tweaking of program mission statements, and any other strategy he can devise?
Can anyone seriously question that the job has barely begun, that the Board must engage in close oversight, and that the final outcome has yet to be determined?
James A. Bacon is the founder of Bacon’s Rebellion and a contributing editor with The Jefferson Council.
