Hamline administrators have mentioned that the university is looking into any institutional provisions that could violate the Department of Education’s (DoEd) interpretation of the law, which now forbids race-based decision making in any form.
52 universities, including the U of M, are currently under investigation for using “racial preferences and stereotypes in education programs and activities,” the DoEd’s Office of Civil Rights said.
The Department had previously stated in a letter that race-based scholarships, housing and prizes were illegal under their definition of Title VI, and schools that offered such opportunities risked facing investigation and loss of federal funding.
“Hamline, like most institutions, is currently evaluating a range of institutional realities from website content to language within grant and scholarship awards,” Vice President of Inclusive Excellence David Everett said via email. “This is a concentrated exercise that includes all areas across the institution and continues to be ongoing.”
45 of the schools are under investigation for partnering with The Ph.D. Project, a nonprofit which seeks to “help business professionals and students from various backgrounds earn Phds,” according to their website. Seven schools, again including the U of M, are being investigated for awarding race-based scholarships or offering a program which “segregates students on the basis of race”.
Everett said that Hamline had not identified any practices implemented by the school which may be deemed illegal under these guidelines by the time of publication.
If an investigation into a university were to result in loss of federal funding, there could be consequences for students, staff and faculty on many levels.
“Areas that could be at risk if universities lose federal funding are tuition rates, as well as financial support for research, admissions and hiring — particularly through the National Institutes of Health. So, this could be very far-reaching in terms of institutional and social implications,” Everett said via email.While a March 1 frequently asked questions (FAQ) letter from the DoEd clarifies that diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies were not by default unlawful, it alleges that such initiatives often mask discriminatory practices. Education is just one of many sectors facing attacks on or cutbacks to DEI.
“The national guidance from supporting organizations suggests that the more aligned and embedded ‘DEI’ is with the stated mission and values of the institution, the less likely it is to appear as a ‘one off’,” Everett said via email.
Everett acknowledged how the concept of DEI has often become reduced to performative gestures and how its modern interpretation is not necessarily true to the original intentions, which date back to mid 20th-century civil rights movements. He said he believes that the strength of DEI practices lies in its initial message.
“Early DEI efforts were about more than representation,” Everett said. “DEI, in its purest intended form, sought to challenge entrenched structural dynamics and cultivate environments where all could thrive — not through superficial representation but by addressing and repairing inequities.”