On January 20, 2025, President Donald Trump signed the Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing Executive Order. As a result, many individuals working on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) projects in the federal government were fired, grants related to DEI were stopped, and many corporations have rolled back their DEI initiatives. On February 14, 2025, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights issued a “Dear Colleague” letter that attempts to greatly expand the Supreme Court’s decision striking down “race-based admissions” in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA). The letter stated that considering race in education – be it admissions, DEI programs, hiring, scholarships, or student services – is unlawful. In addition, the Dear Colleague letter gave colleges and universities 14 days to comply or threatened to take away federal funding. Of note is that the letter writer admits that the letter does not have the force of law in a footnote. Still, the threats in the letter have sent leaders of colleges and universities into a state of uncertainty.
I talked to a few higher education and nonprofit sector leaders to gauge their thoughts on Trump’s anti-DEI efforts and the fallout. Larry Moneta, an Adjunct Professor in the Graduate School of Education at the University of Pennsylvania and the former Vice President for Student Affairs at Duke University, said, “The EO prohibiting DEI has already had profound and deleterious effects throughout higher education and beyond. That’s not to say that DEI policies and practices reform haven’t been needed. DEI expressed as a values system, as a set of guiding principles and as aspirational objectives make great sense.” He added, “DEI as filter and guideline for a host of practices from hiring to teaching offers valuable insights. But, DEI expressions of judgment about individuals and institutions have often been misguided and hurtful.”
Moneta believes that, on balance, DEI has been important for “the leveling of the playing field in and out of the classroom, in access to higher education and to post-graduate job attainment.” Moreover, he shared that DEI has made “institutional research activities more inclusive and expanded the notion of belongingness to a far wider array of participants.”
From Moneta’s perspective, the Trump Administration’s assault on DEI “plays right into all the misconceptions of equity and equality to ensure limited access to privilege and empowerment.” He is hopeful that the DEI movement will continue even “absent legal obligations and a host of champions.” However, he warns that we should expect more efforts to undermine attempts at acknowledging bias in higher education and beyond.” I talked with Moneta after Trump signed the Executive Order and before the Office of Civil Rights issued the Dear Colleague letter. His final words to me were prescient: “We should expect federal funds to be tied to evidence of DEI disregard.”
While Moneta underscored both the value of DEI and the dangers of its dismantling, Karen Gross, the former president of Southern Vermont College and former Senior Policy Advisor for the U.S. Department of Education, expressed deep concerns about the broader implications of such policy shifts for the future of education and governance.
Gross is worried about decisions made by leaders in the federal government, who she believes are focused on short-term political wins without reflecting on long-term consequences. She told me, “Our governmental entities should be doing work that benefits all of us, regardless of our political persuasion. At their core, a quality education is a fundamental value undergirding a successful nation. Surely, we cannot disagree on the importance of a well-educated population.” She added, “We may disagree on the exact ways to achieve these ends, but it is downright dangerous to have leaders whose very behaviors undermine confidence in educational systems.”
Echoing these concerns, Ben Ralston, the President and CEO of the Sachs Foundation and someone who works directly with communities affected by these policies, offers a perspective grounded in both the immediate harm and the resilience of DEI efforts.
The Sachs Foundation supports Black communities in Colorado by removing financial barriers to higher education. According to Ralston, “We are still sifting through the rubble of this most recent battle in the culture war against the “DEI” boogeyman this administration has created. The damage dealt is obvious and painful.”
He reminds us that although offices, jobs, and policies are being stripped from organizations, “destroying infrastructure out of fear and violence does not destroy culture and values.” Relying on both his experience and research, Ralston stated, “Diverse workforces are still the most productive. Equitable societies are still the most just. Inclusive communities are still the most accessible.” He added hopefully, “While this administration continues to feed on the fear and insecurity of the moment, the value of these ideals will eventually win out. Progress is never a straight line, and it is ok to name when we took a punch. Then, after an accounting of the damage, we will be able to identify what needs to be done, take a breath, and get back to work.”
As discussed, many higher education leaders are uncertain and stunned by the rollback of DEI initiatives. Yet, as Moneta, Gross, and Ralston highlight, the values underpinning DEI—equity, opportunity, and inclusion—will not fade away with policy shifts. History shows us that progress is frequently met with resistance, but it also teaches us that meaningful change is built on persistence. As Ralston wisely noted, setbacks are not the end of progress but moments to regroup, strategize, and continue the fight for a more just and inclusive society.