Universities Got Dangerous Advice About DEI and Protests

WASHINGTON - March 23, 2025 - PRLog -- American universities were told not to worry when Trump warned that "All Federal Funding will STOP for any College, School, or University that allows illegal protests. . . NO MASKS!," and also when he threatened lawsuits and funding cutoffs if they continued to embrace and practice DEI.

But a law professor who warned (http://prsync.com/george-washington-university/columbia-university-finally-expels-a--protestor-now-gwu-may-be-next----despite-gwus--spring-fiasco-only--student-suspended-disru-4653420/) that "while this slow, tedious, and forgiving process may have been the practice under prior administrations, it is unlikely to be followed by the new administration . . .  it is more likely that ED's OCR plans to single out one or two prominent universities to stop funding immediately without any opportunity for "reconciliation," was correct.

Columbia University had some $400 million in funding abruptly cut off.

It thus was just forced to agree to a variety of demands - including a ban on masks by demonstrators, an entire department placed in receivership, etc. - as a precondition for even discussing a resumption of funds.

Moreover, the chief of the Federal Task Force to Combat Antisemitism which is investigating Columbia, declared: "I will tell you right now that Columbia has not in my opinion — and the opinion of the Department of Justice — has not cleaned up their act . . .  They're not even close"

Yet many universities still permit illegal protestors to hide their faces with masks, making it very difficult to identify and then punish them where warranted.

Many universities still have departments, programs, administrative positions, and many websites which incorporate words such as "diversity," "inclusion," etc.

That's like putting a "Kick Me" sign on your back, except the sign reads "Defund Me Now."

It has been widely reported that many other universities have rushed to shed words such as "diversity," "inclusion," etc., but not to abandon DEI concepts, programs, and positions.

In other words, in many cases the same administrators and staff in charge of promoting DEI, and the same functions and programs they used to impose DEI, will remain largely intact.

But this attempt to circumvent presidential orders, and use subterfuges to hide what has been declared to be "dangerous, demeaning, and immoral" probably will not work, says the law professor.

At any large university there are many professors who believe that they were denied promotions, raises, or other privileges because of their university's DEI policies; were improperly forced to swear allegiance to a philosophy or world view they do not agree with; or simply oppose the preferences DEI imposed.

They can and probably will "snitch" and "rat out" the university by filing a complaint regarding any possible violations with the Department of Education by following its very simple procedures (https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/howto.html).

http://banzhaf.net/   jbanzhaf3ATgmail.com   @profbanzhaf