As Trump Administration Pushes for Scrubbing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Programs, USC Takes Action

As the Trump administration pushes schools to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs by Friday or face federal funding cuts, the University of Southern California (USC) has scrubbed several references to DEI statements, renamed faculty positions, and, in one case, deleted website references to a scholarship for Black and Indigenous students.

National Trends

Nationwide, universities have taken different stances. The president of Colorado State University, citing a need for federal funding, said it would remake its race-related programs and avoid a “gamble” in challenging the Trump administration. At the University of Cincinnati, the president said that he had “little choice” but to fall in line. Regents for the University of Alaska voted for DEI to be scrubbed from the system. The University of Iowa will end dorm communities next year for Black, Latino, and LGBTQ+ students, according to local news reports.

The president of Wesleyan University in Connecticut has fashioned himself as an icon of resistance and called the White House administration “authoritarian.”

USC Takes Action

At USC, one of the state’s most diverse and largest universities, the response within several colleges and departments has gained attention. To be sure, vast portions of the university’s diversity program descriptions remain untouched on its website. Dozens of webpages reference university support of diversity, including a campuswide Office of Inclusion and Diversity that promotes “USC’s long history of access and opportunity” and support of a “diverse and inclusive community.”

However, some USC schools and colleges — including departments within the Dana and David Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences, the largest university division — have removed DEI references from their websites in recent days.

A department chair’s email — sent to Dornsife linguistics faculty Monday and shared with The Times by three USC employees — made the case in suggesting that faculty change or remove public-facing DEI references.

“… In the light of such very real worries, universities and other institutions dependent on federal funding all over the country are now all removing wording from visible sites that will attract the government AI scrapers looking to identify and route out support for DEI,” said the message from Andrew Simpson, a professor of linguistics. “This is obviously shocking and incredibly distasteful. However, the alternative, to lose all federal grant support would simply be catastrophic.”

“Faculty are not being asked to adjust the content of their teaching,” the memo said, adding later: “Please consider how you may be able to help in this unpleasant exercise, for the purely pragmatic reason of survival.”

Moh El-Naggar, the interim dean of Dornsife, replied via email to a Times request, saying, “We’re navigating our response as an academic unit of USC.”

In a statement, a USC spokesman did not respond to a question about whether there have been university-wide instructions to change or remove DEI statements or programs.

The spokesman directed The Times to a Wednesday campuswide message from President Carol Folt. In it, Folt said, “we will continue to review our programs and practices to ensure both that their direct relationship to our academic mission is clear, and that we comply fully with evolving legal requirements.” The letter linked to an FAQ that said USC was “reviewing its ‘DEI-related’ programs and practices” in order to “ensure alignment with our compliance obligations in light of recent executive orders and agency guidance.”

Some Professors Opposed

In an interview, Howard Rodman, a screenwriter and professor in the Cinematic Arts school, said he opposed the DEI changes.

“I think that USC’s strategy is not to call attention to itself — not to ‘put targets on our backs,’” he said. “We are in essence saying: this is just a change in outward-facing nomenclature that will enable us to continue our good work. To me, this is at best self-consoling rhetoric. Everything I know about authoritarianism is that small compliances only lead to larger compliances, until one is left with neither one’s mission nor one’s dignity.”

Royel Johnson, an associate professor at the USC Rossier School of Education, said he had not heard of instructions to make DEI changes. His school, he noted, still has an associate dean of equity and inclusion.

Schools could be “preemptively making changes at this point as opposed to a mandate from the university,” said Johnson, who is the director of the National Assessment of Collegiate Campus Climates in the USC Race and Equity Center, which studies racial climates at college campuses.

“Because there is so much different messaging from the federal government with guidance, letters, executive orders and court cases, most universities are trying to stay silent or wait until there are clear directives. Some are changing names, leaning into ‘belonging’ or ‘community engagement,’ or some places are getting rid of roles altogether, which is unfortunate,” Johnson said.

“But it is not illegal to do the work of DEI. We have a federal mandate to provide safe spaces. It is not the case that we should not be doing DEI. But in some cases, we should make our language on DEI more specific and refined.”

Conclusion

As the Trump administration pushes for the dismantling of diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, the University of Southern California has taken action by scrubbing several references to DEI statements, renaming faculty positions, and deleting website references to a scholarship for Black and Indigenous students. While some professors have opposed these changes, others have remained silent, citing the need to comply with evolving legal requirements. The fate of DEI programs remains uncertain, with some universities opting to remove DEI references from their websites, while others are navigating the complex landscape of federal guidance and court cases.

FAQs

Q: What is the purpose of the Trump administration’s push for the dismantling of diversity, equity, and inclusion programs?

A: The purpose is to reduce the role of diversity, equity, and inclusion programs in universities and to promote a more neutral or colorblind approach to diversity and inclusion.

Q: What are the implications of the Trump administration’s push for the dismantling of diversity, equity, and inclusion programs?

A: The implications are significant, as universities and colleges may be forced to re-evaluate their diversity and inclusion initiatives, and potentially eliminate programs that promote diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Q: What is the current state of diversity, equity, and inclusion programming at the University of Southern California?

A: The current state of diversity, equity, and inclusion programming at the University of Southern California is uncertain, as the university is reviewing its programs and practices to ensure compliance with evolving legal requirements. Some departments have removed DEI references from their websites, while others are maintaining their diversity and inclusion initiatives.

Q: What is the reaction of university professors to the Trump administration’s push for the dismantling of diversity, equity, and inclusion programs?

A: Some professors have opposed the changes, citing the importance of diversity, equity, and inclusion in higher education, while others have remained silent, citing the need to comply with evolving legal requirements.