All posts tagged "dei"

Holocaust museum staffers say institution censoring itself to avoid Trump wrath

Two former employees at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., have revealed that the institution preemptively changed its programming to avoid the Trump administration's criticism, according to a Politico report on Monday.

As President Donald Trump returned to his second term in office, the museum cut a workshop titled the "fragility of democracy" and scrubbed educational resources about racism in the United States from its website. The moves came as Trump's administration focused on "corrosive ideology," a crackdown and attack on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives and educational content it views as promoting what it considers anti-American values, including lessons about racism and democracy's fragility.

Following Trump's demands that the Smithsonian Institution change "to more closely align its content with his worldview," the administration pushed to remove mentions of DEI initiatives from government websites. He has not commented on USHMM's educational content or website. However, two former staff members spoke under condition of anonymity over fear of retaliation, saying that the museum made several of the changes to try "to not draw unwanted negative attention from the Trump administration."

"It seems like they were trying to proactively fall in line as not to be forced to change," one staffer told Politico.

The museum apparently pulled several items from its online resources, including "Teaching Materials on Nazism and Jim Crow," along with links and other tools centered on "African American Soldiers during World War II" and "Afro-Germans during the Holocaust."

"Since taking office, Trump has tightened his grip on the USHMM, an independent museum that relies on both private donations and federal appropriations and is not affiliated with the Smithsonian," Politico reported. "In an unprecedented move last year, the president purged from its board several of President Joe Biden’s appointees before the end of their terms. And in the months since, he has installed his own loyalists on the board — most notably replacing Stuart Eizenstat, who helped found the museum, with GOP megalobbyist Jeffrey Miller as chair last month."

The museum has denied, in "an unsolicited statement," any pressure from the Trump administration and denied the accusations made by the former employees.

"The Trump administration has not requested any changes to the Museum’s content or programming," a museum spokesperson told Politico.

This GOP chameleon just deployed a smokescreen

On Dec. 21, at Turning Point USA’s annual national conference, Vice President JD Vance took to the stage to denounce the evils of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.

He told the crowd:

We don’t treat anybody different because of their race or their sex, so we have relegated DEI to the dustbin of history, which is exactly where it had belonged. In the United States of America, you don’t have to apologize for being white anymore. And if you’re an Asian, you don’t have to talk around your skin color when you’re applying for college. Because we judge people based on who they are, not on ethnicity and things they can’t control. We don’t persecute you for being male, for being straight, for being gay, for being anything. The only thing that we demand is that you be a great American patriot. And if you’re that, you’re very much on our team.

For Vance, DEI and affirmative action policies are so vile that it “pisses [him] off a million times more” than racial slurs aimed at his own children by an actual white supremacist.

This is because DEI policies, in his view, are specifically designed to harm white men. On Dec. 17, Vance posted on Twitter that, “A lot of people think ‘DEI’ is lame diversity seminars or racial slogans at NFL games. In reality, it was a deliberate program of discrimination against white men. This is an incredible piece that describes the evil of DEI and its consequences.”

The “incredible piece” is an article by Jacob Savage entitled “The Lost Generation.” Savage argues that “DEI wasn’t a gentle rebalancing — it was a profound shift in how power and prestige were distributed.” A redistribution that, Savage argues, harmed “white male millennials” who saw opportunities that would have ordinarily gone to people like him go to people of color and women instead. Savage’s grievance is premised on the assumption that the people who succeed in his place were less qualified — the type of people that he would have triumphed over if not for DEI.

Much of the article is typical anti-DEI rhetoric. But, toward the end, Savage makes the following — almost insightful — point:

It’s strange and more than a little poisonous to see yourself buffeted by forces beyond your control. But there’s also a comfort in it. Because it’s less painful to scroll through other people’s IMDb pages late at night, figuring out what shortcut — race, gender, connections — they took to success, than to grapple with the fact that there are white men my age who’ve succeeded, and I am not one of them. I could have worked harder, I could have networked better, I could have been better. The truth is, I’m not some extraordinary talent who was passed over; I’m an ordinary talent — and in ordinary times that would have been enough.

Savage, like Vance and most anti-DEI advocates, champions “American meritocracy.” Yet, he is somehow upset and surprised that someone with “ordinary talent” failed to succeed. Isn’t this outcome exactly what true, unfettered meritocracy would produce? If everyone, regardless of race, sex, and gender, were able to compete equally, then those who are not “extraordinary” would always struggle to find financial security and success.

The actual problem that Savage is unknowingly pointing to is not DEI. It’s capitalism. Within a capitalist system that prioritizes maximizing profits over people’s well-being, and a political system that offers little to no protection for those capitalism leaves behind, most people will struggle to survive. That is by design.

Capitalism will always, by its very nature, produce “winners” and “losers.” The more people there are competing for a steadily decreasing number of jobs, the more “losers” there will be. A problem that AI — aided by the Trump administration’s effort to eliminate any regulations against it — will likely worsen in the coming years. The only real “winners” in this dynamic are the ultra-wealthy class who continue to succeed regardless of their own individual talents.

If Vance really cared about treating people equally and with dignity, then he would concern himself with tackling the affordability crisis, increasing wages, lowering healthcare costs, building more social safety nets — all issues that the Trump administration is currently failing to address. Worse even, this administration is actively working to undermine many of the programs that would help people like Savage who are struggling to get by.

No matter what Vance says, being “a great American patriot” will never be enough to succeed within the current capitalist system. And Vance knows this.

In Hillbilly Elegy, Vance discusses the significance of “social capital,” or leveraging the networks of people and institutions around us to “connect us to the right people, ensure that we have opportunities, and impart valuable information.” For Vance, his social capital, which included Yale professors, tech billionaires, and former presidential speechwriters, was critical to his success. However, that capital is reserved for the upper class. As he writes, “Those who tap into it and use it prosper. Those who don’t are running life’s race with a major handicap. This is a serious problem for kids like me.”

Ultimately, Vance is not concerned with equality or discrimination. His attacks on DEI are nothing more than a smokescreen. He is evoking racial animosity to distract his supporters from the real problems that capitalism is generating and that the Trump administration is ignoring. He is hoping to exploit people’s genuine frustrations with the status quo to become president in 2028.

Vance preaches inclusivity, but his entire social and political ideology is divisive. He claims that, “We all got wrapped up over the last few years in zero sum thinking. This was because the people who think they rule the world pit us against one another.” But the reality is that Vance’s pro-capitalist, Christian nationalist, and ethnonationalist values are all zero sum ways of thinking that function precisely to divide people.

Vance says that “in the United States of America, you don’t have to apologize for being white anymore.” Yet, white people have never had to apologize for being white. This is performative anger. Vance is using the same rhetoric still used by the KKK — “Never! Never! Apologize for Being White! — to fuel hatred and contempt for his own political gain.

In the America that Vance envisions, people are only judged for “who they are” — unless they’re immigrants, transgender, women, Muslims, or people of color. Within the very same speech that Vance champions equality for all, he attacks Somali Americans. He tells the audience that “Democrats are not sending their best. Omar Fateh was Ilhan Omar’s candidate for mayor of Mogadishu. Wait, I mean Minneapolis. Little Freudian slip there” — smiling as the crowd laughed along.

As one of his former friends puts it, Vance is a “chameleon. Someone who is able to change their positions and their values depending on what will amass them political power and wealth. And I think that’s really unfortunate, because it reflects a lack of integrity.” His drastic change of heart about Trump is proof of how easily he can change his colors. Vance went from Trump is “America’s Hitler” to now serving as his vice president within the span of a few years. His anti-DEI rhetoric is just another political maneuver meant to serve his own interest.

All that said, Vance is right about one thing — “The people who think they rule the world pit us against one another.” Those people include him. We can’t let him succeed.

Without this group of people, there would be no President Trump

I have cut back on the time I spend on social media since last year’s terrible elections. It might be the only good that’s come from one of the worst days in American history.

A once thriving Twitter account is now dead and buried. I simply can’t be anywhere the ghastly Elon Musk and his phony hate-mongers. The place is an overflowing trashcan full of so many lies, and awful things, it’s a wonder it hasn’t self-combusted.

These days, I kick around Bluesky, and Substack’s Notes when I feel like I need to get something off my chest in a hurry.

Last week, white people’s support for Donald Trump and his revolting Republican Party was eating away at me as it often does, so I let go the below blast:

The very direct point, of course, was that without white people, there’d be no President Trump.

“Most white people” got that point, but too many didn’t for my taste, and were indignant that I would type such a thing. Many white commenters made it clear that they didn't vote for Trump, and/or scolded me for scapegoating them.

Here’s a few examples:

“Wow. What a massive generalization. Lots of brown and black people voted for him too but it’s really irrelevant because it’s not a race thing. It’s a stupid thing. There are lots of dumb people in this country who have zero critical thinking skills. That’s the problem. Not all the bad white people.”

“Uh, I don’t know where you got your stats from … but I’m not so sure. Certainly not this white person …”

“It is not most white people. It’s a select few fucking idiots.”

Thankfully, more got it, than didn’t. This one wins a trophy:

“As white people who *personally* did not vote for him, let’s acknowledge that OUR DEMOGRAPHIC did vote for him. The collective “We” must OWN that, and work harder to engage those who voted for him, or who didn’t vote at all.”

Listen to me: You don’t get credit for simply doing the right thing by not voting for a bigot. It’s the very least that should be expected of you. Voting against a vulgar racist like Trump should be as easy and reflexive as putting on a warm jacket to ward off the bitter cold.

The terrible fact is that in all three elections that the appalling Trump was on the ballot, a majority (most) of white people in America voted for him.

Is everybody a racist who supports Trump? Maybe not, but everybody who did vote for him is a hardcore racist, or best case, ignored his long history of hate, to knowingly put a racist in our White House.

Many of these morally bankrupt people are probably some of your friends and family, or in my case, and as I made clear, ex-friends and family.

Here’s the breakdown of the last three presidential elections from the Pew Research Center. I am not sure why the 2016 numbers are incomplete, but you’ll want to concentrate on the white men and white women columns:

In all three elections that Trump was on the ballot, “most” white men and women voted for him. Hence, my post above.

Now that you’ve had a chance to look at these dreadful numbers, let’s also acknowledge that America mostly has a terrible white man problem, and that there is still a mountain of work to do scouring out the terrible misogyny that still pervades too many households, workplaces and the current White House.

Misogyny goes hand in hand with racism, and is a destructive disease eating away at millions of weak, impressionable minds.

This past week or so alone, Trump, who is rotting from the inside out right in front of our eyes, has called female reporters, “Piggy” and “stupid, horrible and ugly.” This follows a long pattern over his morbid lifetime of disparaging women, and mostly their appearance.

HE, an orange mess of a man, who tapes a dead ferret to his head each morning, is mocking other people’s looks.

But back to the eyesore of a graphic above …

Please take a hard look what Black voters did. I have typed before, and will type until my last breath, that they are America’s true patriots, and the only voting bloc that overwhelmingly and consistently gets it right.

I make it a point of walking in their shoes and at least trying to see things through their eyes whenever I can. How incredibly sad it must be to see white people fail so catastrophically at the polls each year, by electing lowlifes who see white supremacy in America as a virtue, instead of a plague.

I try to imagine how many people would have been shot dead on the spot Jan. 6, 2021, if Black people had dared attack our Capitol and beat and stomped law enforcement officials into the curb, as all those lawless, violent white people did on one of America’s darkest days.

Would Trump have told these thugs that he loved them after that horrific day?

It defies logic that anybody could have watched what happened at our Capitol, and what has happened to the criminals who attacked us since, and not see the rampant, odious white privilege in this country.

I try to imagine how Black people must feel as schools, universities, and corporations recklessly abandoned their Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) efforts in the terrible wake of Trump’s win last year.

These important initiatives, many, decades in the making, now lay in the rubble because of the weak, submissive white people, who either never believed in what they were doing, or worse, are too cowardice to stand up for what is most certainly good … and right … and FAIR.

Because DEI has never once been about favoritism, it is about fairness. If you think Black people have gotten a fair shake in this country, then in addition to your bout with bigotry, you have a terrible case of lying to yourself.

As a white man, who has had every advantage in life, I will not stop hammering these points home. I will not surrender to bigots like Trump, and the horrible people who support him, and like the commenter said above, will “work harder to engage those who voted for him, or who didn’t vote at all.”

This is my core issue — the one that courses through my veins and gives my life real meaning.

I cannot think of men like Martin Luther King Jr. or John Lewis without getting a lump in my throat. These were giants, who endured beatings and even death to take America to a better place. We honor them, by standing on their broad shoulders and rising ever higher.

I will continue to speak up about racial equity, and down against people who do everything possible to prevent it. I will never stop talking about it, because that is exactly what these racists want.

Everything must be done to eradicate racism in America, because until it is dead and gone, we can never dare to say or believe that all men and women are created equal.

Right now, that is simply another lie, and shame on us for not doing everything in our power as caring humans beings to finally correct it.

D. Earl Stephens is the author of “Toxic Tales: A Caustic Collection of Donald J. Trump’s Very Important Letters” and finished up a 30-year career in journalism as the Managing Editor of Stars and Stripes. You can find all his work here.

Republicans are not just rewriting the past — they’re coming for the dictionaries too

In the symphony that is modern American conservatism, harmony is the enemy.

The orchestra consists of conspiracy theorists, bigots, anarchistic libertarians, fascists, misogynists, evangelicals, gun fanatics, anti-environmentalists, nativists, and ultra-capitalists, and each makes their contribution to our 21st-century national anthem of dissonance.

In New Hampshire, where Republicans control the House, Senate, governor’s office, and Executive Council, that frenzied composition scores our days. From the opening pomp of privatized public education, through the “Ride of the Valkyries” inspired assault on immigrants, civil rights, and programs that support social progress and services, every misanthropic stanza follows the downshift beat of our defining anti-tax lunacy and the geographic, social, and economic inequality it faithfully delivers.

While each individual player is largely focused just on the sound of their own instrument, with some horn blasts more blatantly hateful than others, the invisible hand conducting this monstrosity understands the true power of the collective disharmony. The performance is a benefit concert for the modern robber barons, for whom there is no sweeter melody than the battle cry of an electorate at war with each other instead of them.

In isolation, every note is sour. Consider, for example, New Hampshire Republicans’ reignited crusade, in all of its low-information glory, against the state’s Office of Health Access.

Early this year, Rep. Mike Belcher, a Wakefield Republican, proposed legislation targeting what was then known as the Office of Health Equity, among other civil rights programs that Belcher and his band of Republican co-sponsors labeled DEI and therefore “evil.”

One of Belcher’s sympathetic House colleagues, Rep. Jess Edwards, of Auburn, said he had the same initial reaction but then learned that the state Department of Health and Human Services had merely chosen a regrettable name for the office. Edwards said that as it turns out, and much to his own amazement, the office was actually just trying to “remove barriers to make sure we all have an equal access to care.” You know, like equity.

There was also the little detail, bewildered state officials said at the time, that the services provided by the Office of Health Equity — including for refugees and people with disabilities — are required under federal law.

In a rare moment of conservative sanity, a compromise was eventually reached and the office was preserved, albeit under the less-woke letterhead of “Office of Health Access.”

A happy-ish ending? Well, not so fast. Republicans are wise to DEI trickery, they say, so last week they launched another assault on that old office with the new name. On Nov. 12, the House Health and Human Services Committee advanced legislation, despite the bill being “problematic,” to once and for all eliminate the Office of Health Access, federal requirements be damned.

Why would Republican lawmakers waste so much time trying to destroy programs that the state Department of Health and Human Services would just have to recreate elsewhere? Because DEI.

To understand why Belcher and others in his tinhorn section believe DEI is so evil, I suppose you have to consider the definitions behind the acronym. Merriam-Webster says “diversity” means “the state or practice of including people of different races, cultures, etc. in a group or organization.” Equity means “fairness or justice in the way people are treated.” And inclusion means, simply, “the act of including.”

Apparently it’s not enough that Republicans are rewriting the past; they’re also coming for the dictionaries. In the new lexicon, diversity, equity, and inclusion are synonymous with evil. A truly just and equal society, the conservatives argue, would be “morally reprehensible.”

That’s the kind of up-is-down, black-is-white moment we’re stuck in.

There was a time, as discordant as our national history may be, when such moral backwardness would have gotten you remanded to silence at the farthest political fringe.

Not anymore. Now you get a primo chair on the Republican stage, where no measure is too absurd to be amplified.

To the maestro’s ears, it’s all music.

Dana Wormald, a lifelong resident of New Hampshire, has been a newspaper editor for more than 25 years. He began his career on the Concord Monitor’s news desk in 1995 and later spent more than a decade at the New Hampshire Union Leader. In 2014, he returned to the Monitor to serve as opinion editor, a position he held until being named editor of the Bulletin. Email: dwormald@newhampshirebulletin.com

How Trump's racism-fueled revenge tour came for workers in St. Louis

Donald Trump’s revenge tour has come to St. Louis.

But this time, it’s not about prosecutors or political enemies. It’s about dismantling civil rights programs — and it’s personal.

Nearly 2,000 minority and women-owned businesses at Lambert International Airport just learned they must prove they were discriminated against — with evidence locked in their competitors’ files — or lose their ability to bid on federal contracts.

Under new Trump administration guidelines issued last week, contractors must submit “personal narratives” detailing specific economic harm compared to “non-disadvantaged” businesses. They must prove, with a “preponderance of evidence,” that they were denied financing on terms their white competitors received.

How are they supposed to find the evidence? Bank loan terms are confidential. Competitors’ financing deals are private. The contractors are being asked to document discrimination they cannot possibly access.

They can’t. And that’s precisely the point.

The targets of Trump’s dismantling campaign? Civil rights programs created to remedy the exact kind of discrimination he was accused of — and denied — more than a half-century ago.

In 1973, the Nixon administration’s Department of Justice sued Donald Trump and his father for refusing to rent apartments to Black families across 39 buildings in Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island. The government charged that Trump Management refused to rent to people “because of race and color,” required different rental terms based on race, and misrepresented to Black families that apartments weren’t available.

Trump’s response to the federal civil rights lawsuit?

“They are absolutely ridiculous. We never have discriminated, and we never would.”

He settled without admitting wrongdoing, paid no fine, and faced no requirement to prove his innocence. The discrimination lawsuit — backed by DOJ lawyers, civil rights investigators, and documented evidence — simply went away.

Fifty-two years later, President Trump demands that minority contractors prove they’ve been discriminated against, using evidence they cannot access, or lose their ability to compete for federal contracts.

The double standard is the point: Discrimination you can deny, even with the Justice Department’s lawyers and evidence arrayed against you. Oppression you must document in triplicate, with impossible proof, or lose everything.

The timing couldn’t be worse for St. Louis. Lambert is planning a $2.8 billion terminal renovation — the largest construction project in the region in decades. From 2015 to 2019, the airport reported 28. percent participation by disadvantaged businesses under the old program. Those billions in contracts represented real wealth-building in communities systematically excluded from economic opportunity.

Now the rules change just as the money arrives. Adolphus Pruitt, president of the St. Louis City NAACP, had this to say to the Post-Dispatch:

“By shifting the burden of proof onto minority and disadvantaged business owners with these deeply subjective requirements, the federal government risks reviving old discriminatory barriers under the guise of ‘neutrality.’”

That word — neutrality — is a lie. In an unequal system built on centuries of exclusion, “neutrality” isn’t neutral. It freezes existing disparities in place. It has nothing to do with merit; it’s about returning to the days when white, male contractors got pretty much all the business.

The Lambert changes are part of a coordinated national assault on diversity programs. On his first day in office, Trump displayed his contempt for the civil rights movement of the 1960s by revoking the 1965 executive order requiring federal contractors to maintain affirmative action plans.

In May, the DoJ moved to dismantle the entire $37 billion Disadvantaged Business Enterprise program serving 49,000 contractors nationwide. All federal DEI staff have been placed on leave for eventual termination.

It cannot be overstated that the DBE program itself was created in 1983 during the Reagan administration. Republicans who go along with Trump’s treachery might want to keep Reagan’s name out of their mouths.

Reagan did, after all, sign off on a bipartisan acknowledgment that discrimination in contracting was real and required remedy. Federal officials estimate the new rules will cause a 10 percent nationwide drop in certified firms and cost $92 million to implement. But those numbers vastly understate the impact.

This follows the blueprint laid out in Project 2025, which explicitly called for prosecuting “all state and local governments, institutions of higher education, corporations, and any other private employers” with DEI programs.

As John Bowman, president of NAACP St. Louis County and an airport commissioner, aptly told the Post-Dispatch, the “political scapegoating … will have a devastating impact on minority and women-owned businesses.” Which, of course, was Project 2025’s dream outcome.

The contractors at Lambert aren’t asking for handouts. They’re asking for what the DBE program was designed to provide: a fair shot at competing for publicly funded work after decades of documented exclusion. Now they’re being told to prove they deserved that shot all along—to produce evidence of their own oppression as a prerequisite for economic participation.

This answers a fundamental question about who gets to build America’s infrastructure — and who gets built out of the American dream entirely. The man who said “we never have discriminated, and we never would” — while the Justice Department documented otherwise — now demands minority contractors prove their discrimination with evidence he never had to produce.

Say this much for Donald Trump. When it comes to settling old grievances about getting busted for racism, he has a fine memory.

Ray Hartmann writes on Substack at Ray Hartmann's Soapbox.

Trump thinks this issue is a vote winner — 25 states disagree

By Hilary Lustick, Associate Professor of Education, UMass Lowell.

It’s been about six months since the U.S. Department of Education sent a “Dear Colleague” letter to all schools that receive federal funding, warning them that they could risk losing this money if they promote what the department calls “pervasive and repugnant” racial preferences.

The letter, among other things, reversed previous presidents’ positions on how diversity, equity and inclusion influences schools’ disciplinary measures. It advised schools to, within two weeks, begin to eliminate all discipline protocols rooted in DEI, on the grounds that this work is discriminatory against white students.

Trump also issued an executive order, “Reinstating Commonsense School Discipline Policy,” in April 2025, doubling down on the letter.

Trump’s letter and executive order exert an unusual level of influence over how schools can decide the best way to teach and, when necessary, discipline students. It also cuts against recognized research that Black, Latino and Native American students are disciplined more frequently and harshly than white and Asian students.

I am an educational scholar who has spent the past 13 years analyzing school discipline policy. While previous administrations have issued “Dear Colleague” letters to schools, Trump’s is the first that frames itself as though it were law — setting a potential new precedent for the executive branch to issue educational mandates without the approval of the judicial or congressional branches of government.

While all but two states have responded to Trump’s letter, about half of them have said they are not going to comply with its terms — despite the administration’s threat of cutting funding if they do not follow the guidance.

Understanding DEI in education

Equity-oriented education, or diversity, equity and inclusion, refers to an ideology and programming that intend to ameliorate patterns of racial inequality. In the context of discipline in schools, DEI strategies could include teachers having conversations with children about their behavior, rather than immediately suspending them.

Research shows that these techniques can help reduce racial discipline gaps in academic achievement and disciplinary outcomes.

The Obama administration in 2014 recognized this research in its own “Dear Colleague” letter to schools. The administration advised schools to either reform their discipline practices toward nonpunitive alternatives to suspension or risk being investigated for discrimination.

The first Trump administration rescinded this letter in 2018.

Then, in 2023, the Biden administration released a document along the same lines as Obama’s letter.

Trump’s February 2025 letter grouped all of these recommendations under the banner of “DEI” and argued that such practices are discriminatory, privileging students of color over white and Asian students.

In his April executive order, Trump reiterated that if schools did not eliminate DEI, they would be out of compliance with Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. This act prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin,

Public school districts regularly have to issue a certificate of compliance to the government showing that their work is in line with Title VI.

While the Trump administration characterizes DEI as “smuggling racial stereotypes and explicit race-consciousness into everyday training, programming, and discipline,” it does not define exactly what constitutes DEI programming.

This puts school districts at risk of losing funding if they maintain any initiatives related to racial equality.

Legal concerns

The executive office and members of Congress typically issue “Dear Colleague” letters, which are not legally binding, to advise schools and others on policy.

Yet Trump’s letter was written like a mandate and reinforced by an executive order, which is legally binding.

Some scholars are calling the letter an “overreach” of legal authority.

In the spring of 2025, I analyzed states’ responses to Trump’s letter and executive order.

Two states, Iowa and Tennessee, had not yet provided public responses.

Twenty-three states complied with the administration’s directive by signing the letter as of May 30. Some, like Oklahoma, not only certified the letter but also passed state laws banning DEI policies and programs.

The remaining 25 states refused to certify the letter, asserting that they already complied with Title VI and that their policies are not discriminatory.

In addition, 19 of those 25 states sued the Trump administration over the letter in April, culminating in a court injunction later that month that temporarily released states from having to comply with its demands.

I noticed that many states that refuted Trump’s letter used the same exact words in their responses, signaling a concerted effort to resist Trump’s directives. States that did not sign on to the letter but objected to its intent generally resisted on legal grounds, ethics or both.

Most states that rejected it grounded their refusal to sign Trump’s letter in federal law. They cited the Civil Rights Act and the Paperwork Reduction Act, which protects states from having to file redundant paperwork. Because these states already certified compliance with Title VI, this argument goes, they should not have to do so again under Trump’s directive.

Education commissioners from a few states, including Illinois and Minnesota, also cited specific language used by Betsy DeVos, Trump’s former education secretary in his first term, who supported DEI policies.

Charlene Russell-Tucker, the education commissioner for Connecticut, also pointed out that in order for the federal government to cancel DEI programming, it would have to first legally change the definition of Title VI.

Resisting on other grounds

Some education officials also argued that their DEI work is ideologically necessary for providing supportive learning environments for all students.

Patrick Tutwiler, Massachusetts’ interim education commissioner, wrote in an April 16 letter, for example, that “Massachusetts will continue to promote diversity in our schools because we know it improves outcomes for all of our kids.”

Other officials displayed more subtle resistance. Randy Watson, Kansas’ education commissioner, for example, affirmed the state’s “commitment to comply with all Federal statutes,” including Title VI — but did not explicitly address Trump’s “Dear Colleague” letter.

Similarly, Kentucky informed the Department of Education of its compliance with federal law, while simultaneously encouraging local districts to continue diversity, equity and inclusion work.

Mississippi’s state department of education pointed out that school districts operate independently, so the state cannot force policies on them. However, Mississippi signaled compliance by citing a new state law banning DEI and confirmed that each of its individual school districts have already certified compliance with federal laws.

More pushback

It is not yet clear what might follow the April court injunction, which largely prevented the Department of Education from cutting federal funding to schools that continued their DEI-related programs and policies.

While the Trump administration has made major cuts to the Department of Education, it has not announced that states refusing to certify the letter will lose funding.

This is the first time an administration is issuing such a direct threat to withhold K-12 funding, placing schools in an unknown place, without a clear blueprint of how to move forward.

MAGA fury finds new target — this time it's embodiment of Deep South

The MAGA law group America First Legal (AFL) is suing Cracker Barrel restaurants for alleged discriminatory employment practices over the company's promotion of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI), according to The New York Post.

AFL filed complaints Monday with the Tennessee Attorney General and the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC), citing documents and reports alleging the company "maintains illegal DEI frameworks."

The filings also chastised Cracker Barrel, which prides itself on its Southern country theme, for "rebranding its dedicated DEI website to 'Culture and Belonging,' arguing that the name change did not halt Cracker Barrel from using 'diversity' as a proxy for race or sex," the report said.

AFL is against the restaurant's policy of offering "employment benefits only available to employees belonging to certain races or sexes." These include developing Black leaders, promoting Hispanic and Latino culture, and nurturing those in the LGBT and neurodivergent communities.

“Cracker Barrel’s policies openly discriminate against heterosexual, white, and male employees in favor of diverse employees,” according to AFL’s complaint.

Shortly after taking office in January, President Donald Trump issued a series of executive orders targeting diversity programs and gender identity policies in the government as part of his "mandate" to dismantle "woke" culture. The legal challenges began soon thereafter, and continue to wind their way through the courts.

Meanwhile, law firms reported fielding "panicked" calls from chief executives worried that Trump might come after their companies. Some businesses like Mark Zuckerberg's META preemptively canceled its DEI programs to align with the administration's goals. The administration has gone on to target certain law firms and universities for their DEI policies.

According to the Post, "Cracker Barrel did not respond to repeated requests for comment in time for publication."

Read The New York Post article here.

Donald Trump concedes 'automatic loss' in Harvard case before judge even rules

President Donald Trump conceded an "automatic loss" in the Harvard federal funding case before Judge Allison D. Burroughs even ruled on Monday.

Trump posted to social media, "The Harvard case was just tried in Massachusetts before an Obama appointed Judge. She is a TOTAL DISASTER, which I say even before hearing her Ruling. She has systematically taken over the various Harvard cases, and is an automatic 'loss' for the People of our Country!"

Harvard sued the Trump administration for withholding $2.6 billion in federal funds as punishment for allegedly allowing antisemitism to run rampant on campus.

NBC News reported Monday afternoon that the judge did, in fact, appear to "lean in favor of Harvard University" during oral arguments.

Trump's post continued, "Harvard has $52 Billion Dollars sitting in the Bank, and yet they are anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, and anti-America. Much of this money comes from the U.S.A., all to the detriment of other Schools, Colleges, and Institutions, and we are not going to allow this unfair situation to happen any longer.

"How did this Trump-hating Judge get these cases? When she rules against us, we will IMMEDIATELY appeal, and WIN. Also, the Government will stop the practice of giving many Billions of Dollars to Harvard, much of which had been given without explanation. It is a longtime commitment to Fairness in Funding Education, and the Trump Administration will not stop until there is VICTORY. Thank you for your attention to this matter!"

Pete Hegseth urges a 'passive approach' to end-of-slavery celebrations: report

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who spearheaded Donald Trump's anti-DEI initiatives at the Pentagon, urged staffers not to make a fuss around Juneteenth celebrations, according to reporting in Rolling Stone.

Politics editor Andrew Perez obtained an email from Hegseth's office that "requested 'a passive approach to Juneteenth messaging' for the holiday on Thursday commemorating the end of slavery."

The email was sent by "the Pentagon’s Office of the Chief of Public Affairs, which said it wasn’t planning to publish Juneteenth-related content online," Perez wrote.

The date June 19th was declared a federal holiday by President Joe Biden in 2021 after a bill unanimously passed the Senate and received "broad bipartisan support" in the House. It commemorates the day at the end of the Civil War in 1865 when enslaved people in Texas were told that slavery had been abolished throughout the United States.

Dwayne E. Campbell with the African American Veterans Liaison, explained the significance of Juneteenth for Black veterans like himself in an article for VA News, "an official website of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs."

"Juneteenth is not just a day of celebration—it’s a day to remember the price of freedom and the ongoing work needed to preserve it," Campbell wrote. "For Black Veterans, it is a moment to reflect on the sacrifices of those who paved the way, recognizing that military service has always been at the tip of the spear."

He added that "Black Veterans, past and present" stand as a "testament to the resilience of a people who fought for their country even when their country did not fully fight for them."

When Rolling Stone asked the Pentagon for comment on Juneteenth, the outlet was told that the DOD “may engage in the following activities, subject to applicable department guidance: holiday celebrations that build camaraderie and esprit de corps; outreach events (e.g., recruiting engagements with all-male, all-female, or minority-serving academic institutions) where doing so directly supports DoD’s mission; and recognition of historical events and notable figures where such recognition informs strategic thinking, reinforces our unity, and promotes meritocracy and accountability.”

Since taking office, President Trump has vowed to replace diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives with "merit-based" programs.

In a Senate hearing Wednesday, Hegseth declared, “DEI is dead. We replaced it with a colorblind, gender-neutral, merit-based approach, and the force is responding incredibly.”

Read the Rolling Stone article here.

Dairy farmer's lawsuit claims Trump is discriminating against whites

A Wisconsin farmer is suing the Trump administration's Department of Agriculture over its continued use of diversity, equity and inclusion programs that he says are keeping white, male farmers from receiving loan forgiveness.

The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty filed the lawsuit against the USDA Monday "on behalf of white dairy farmer, Adam Faust," according to the Associated Press.

The AP quoted Faust saying in a statement, “The USDA should honor the President’s promise to the American people to end racial discrimination in the federal government. After being ignored by a federal agency that’s meant to support agriculture, I hope my lawsuit brings answers, accountability, and results from USDA.”

Since taking office in January, Trump has worked to dismantle DEI programs throughout the government in keeping with the president's promise to "focus on merit."

Faust's lawsuit alleged that the current USDA continues to implement Biden-era DEI programs subjecting "2 million white male American farmers...to discriminatory race-based policies" by putting "white men at a disadvantage" and violating "the Constitution’s guarantee of equal treatment by discriminating based on race and sex."

As an example, the lawsuit alleged that Faust and other white, male farmers are charged a $100 "administration fee" to participate in one program that exempts women and minority farmers from paying the same fee.

In another example, Faust "participates in a USDA program that guarantees 90% of the value of loans to white farmers, but 95% to women and racial minorities," according to the report.

Both instances put Faust at a disadvantage, the lawsuit alleged.

The AP reported that Faust and several other farmers "successfully sued the Biden administration in 2021 for race discrimination in the USDA’s Farmer Loan Forgiveness Plan."

A Trump administration spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment, according to the report.

Read the AP report here.