The Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has launched an investigation into George Mason University (GMU) for allegedly using diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies to give preferential treatment to faculty and prospective employees from “underrepresented groups” to advance “anti-racism.” If accurate, its actions violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination in educational institutions that receive federal funds. GMU is not alone, however. Dozens of universities are trying to fool the government, but they’re apparently doing a poor job of it.

Disguised DEI Fails Sniff Test

For whatever reason, it seems numerous universities just can’t let go of these discriminatory practices. On dozens of campuses nationwide, DEI remains a bedrock when hiring and promoting faculty. To elude the Trump administration, some universities have pretended to shut down DEI offices and programs but have only rebranded them with different language.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again. Your subscription has been successful. “Despite the leadership of George Mason University claiming that it does not discriminate on the basis of race, it appears that its hiring and promotion policies and practices … not only allow but champion illegal racial preferencing,” said Craig Trainor, acting assistant secretary for the ED’s Office for Civil Rights.

In March 2025, GMU President Gregory Washington sent a university-wide email informing recipients that the “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” office would now be the “Office of Access, Compliance, and Community.” No changes to hiring and promotion would be necessary, said Washington, claiming GMU has “always complied with existing civil rights laws.”

Yet the complaint filed with OCR suggests otherwise. It alleges GMU used “Equity Advisors in every academic department” who consider “race, sex, and other characteristics” when recruiting faculty. Another violation listed claims GMU created “a Task Force on Anti-Racism and Inclusive Excellence (ARIE) to make university policies which will ‘advance systemic and cultural anti-racism’ at GMU,” according to the ED’s press release announcing the investigation.

It’s baffling that those who believe in this ideological rubbish can’t see the contradiction. To fight discrimination with more discrimination makes about as much sense as restricting speech to save free speech. That the pursuit is justified with the goal of “equity” doesn’t make it any less illegal.

Word Games

Instead of the Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, now it’s the Office of Community Connections, for example, or the Division of Access and Opportunity. Words like access, engagement, belonging, and advocacy are often dead giveaways. Universities of Maine, Iowa, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, and Oklahoma have all rebranded, to name a few, though around 105 universities across 36 states are disguising offices and programs in thinly veiled language, according to Off the Press’ DEI Rebrand Tracker. Of course, there are probably more.

Some faculty have been caught on camera admitting to flouting the DEI ban by “finessing” the language, as one employee put it when unknowingly speaking to an investigative journalist from Accuracy in Media (AIM), a conservative watchdog. In another instance, “Megan Pugh, the now-former Dean of Students for UNC Asheville, told AIM’s investigators she has to keep DEI work ‘quiet’ and on the ‘down-low,’ but that she ‘loves breaking rules.’” Pugh was reportedly fired not long after the video went public, though DEI is apparently still circulating within North Carolina’s universities.

Ever since the Supreme Court ruled in 2023 that race-based affirmative action programs could no longer be used in college admissions (see Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard), some universities have slowly dismantled or dialed back their DEI practices. Research by The College Fix shows roughly 78 schools have complied with Trump’s executive order and shut down their DEI practices. Some say the diversity doctrine makes universities more welcoming and inclusive for students, but how can that be true when the process is inherently exclusive? It’s a language game that seemingly nobody can win because the words are slippery and have no definitive meanings.

Dig Deeper Into the Themes Discussed in This Article!

Liberty Vault: Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard

~

Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.