Podcasts about title vi

This Day in Legal History: JuneteenthOn this day in legal history, June 19, 1865, Union Major General Gordon Granger arrived in Galveston, Texas, and issued General Order No. 3, announcing that all enslaved people in Texas were free. This day, now known as Juneteenth, marked the effective end of slavery in the United States—coming more than two years after President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863. The delay was due in large part to the limited presence of Union troops in Texas to enforce the proclamation.Granger's announcement informed Texas residents that “all slaves are free,” a declaration that redefined the legal and social landscape of the state and solidified the federal government's authority over the Confederacy's last holdout. While the Emancipation Proclamation had declared freedom for slaves in Confederate states, it did not immediately end slavery everywhere, nor did it provide enforcement mechanisms beyond Union military power. Juneteenth represents the day when emancipation finally reached the furthest corners of the Confederacy through legal and military authority.In the years following, Juneteenth became a symbol of African American freedom and resilience, celebrated with community gatherings, education, and reflection. Texas made Juneteenth a state holiday in 1980, the first state to do so. On June 17, 2021, it became a federal holiday when President Joe Biden signed the Juneteenth National Independence Day Act into law. The legal significance of Juneteenth lies in its embodiment of both the promise and the delay of justice, highlighting the gap between the law's proclamation and its realization.A conservative legal group, Faculty, Alumni, and Students Opposed to Racial Preferences (FASORP), has sued the Michigan Law Review and its affiliated leadership, claiming that its member selection process illegally favors women, racial minorities, and LGBTQ+ applicants. Filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, the complaint alleges that personal statements and holistic review metrics are evaluated using race and sex preferences, violating both federal and state anti-discrimination laws. The group contends that conservative students, especially those associated with the Federalist Society, are excluded from review committees due to their presumed opposition to the practice.FASORP is backed by attorney Jonathan Mitchell and America First Legal, led by former Trump official Stephen Miller. The organization has brought similar legal challenges against NYU and Northwestern, and its suit aligns with broader attacks on diversity policies at elite institutions. It seeks an injunction, damages, and court oversight of a revised selection process for the journal, along with a halt to federal funding until changes are made.The group claims violations of Title VI and Title IX, as well as 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1985, the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and the Equal Protection Clause. The review's five-part selection process—including essays and grades—has no fixed evaluation formula, which FASORP argues opens the door to discriminatory discretion. Judge Judith E. Levy is assigned to the case.Conservative Group Accuses Michigan Law Review of Selection BiasA federal judge in Texas has struck down a Biden administration rule aimed at protecting the privacy of patients seeking abortions and gender-affirming care. Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk ruled that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) overstepped its authority when it adopted the rule, which barred healthcare providers and insurers from disclosing information about legal abortions to state law enforcement. The decision halts enforcement of the rule nationwide.Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee, argued that HHS lacked explicit congressional approval to implement heightened protections for procedures viewed as politically sensitive. The rule was introduced in 2024 following the Supreme Court's reversal of Roe v. Wade, as part of the Biden administration's efforts to defend reproductive healthcare access.The lawsuit was brought by Texas physician Carmen Purl, represented by the conservative Alliance Defending Freedom, which claimed the rule misused privacy laws unrelated to abortion or gender identity. Previously, Kacsmaryk had temporarily blocked enforcement of the rule against Purl, but this week's decision broadens that to all states.HHS has not responded publicly to the ruling, and a separate legal challenge to the same rule remains active in another Texas federal court. The case underscores ongoing tensions between federal privacy regulations and state-level abortion restrictions in the post-Roe legal environment.US judge invalidates Biden rule protecting privacy for abortions | ReutersXlear, a hygiene product company, has filed a lawsuit against the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), challenging the agency's authority to require “substantiation” for product claims under its false advertising rules. The suit, filed in federal court in Utah, follows the FTC's recent decision to drop a case it had pursued since 2021, which alleged that Xlear falsely advertised its saline nasal spray as a COVID-19 prevention and treatment product.Xlear argues that the FTC is exceeding its legal mandate by demanding scientific backing for advertising claims, stating that the FTC Act does not explicitly authorize such a requirement. The company's legal team is leaning on the 2024 Supreme Court ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which limited the deference courts must give to federal agencies when interpreting statutes—a significant departure from the longstanding Chevron doctrine.The company seeks a court ruling that merely making claims without substantiation does not violate FTC rules. Xlear has also criticized the agency for engaging in what it calls “vexatious litigation,” claiming it spent over $3 million defending itself before the FTC abandoned its lawsuit without explanation.The FTC has not yet commented or made a court appearance in this new case. The challenge could set important precedent on the scope of agency power over advertising standards in the wake of the Supreme Court's shift on judicial deference.Lawsuit challenges FTC authority over 'unsubstantiated' advertising claims | ReutersA federal judge in Rhode Island signaled skepticism toward the Trump administration's attempt to tie federal transportation funding to state cooperation with immigration enforcement. During a hearing, Chief U.S. District Judge John McConnell questioned whether U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy had legal authority to impose immigration-related conditions on grants meant for infrastructure projects. McConnell, an Obama appointee, challenged the relevance of immigration enforcement to the Transportation Department's mission, drawing a parallel to whether the department could also withhold funds based on abortion laws.The case involves 20 Democratic-led states opposing the April 24 directive, which conditions billions in infrastructure grants on compliance with federal immigration law, including cooperation with ICE. The states argue the requirement is unconstitutional, vague, and attempts to coerce state governments into enforcing federal immigration policy without clear legislative authorization.Justice Department lawyers defended the policy as aligned with national safety concerns, but struggled under McConnell's probing. He noted that the administration's broad language and public stance on sanctuary jurisdictions could not be ignored and appeared to support the states' argument that the directive lacks clarity and statutory grounding.The judge is expected to issue a ruling by Friday, before the states' grant application deadline. This lawsuit is part of a broader legal and political battle as Trump pushes sanctuary cities and states to aid in mass deportations.US judge skeptical of Trump plan tying states' transportation funds to immigration | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

It is widely known that schools have instituted equity-focused policies, teacher training, and curriculum. Critics wonder whether this focus on equity is illegal and unconstitutional.Deemar v. District 65 (Evanston/Skokie) involves Dr. Stacy Deemar, a drama teacher in Evanston/Skokie School District 65 in Illinois. She has challenged the District’s allegedly racially charged environment and practice of segregating students and staff. In January 2021, the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights (OCR) determined that the District violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. But soon after President Biden took office, OCR withdrew that finding without explanation. Dr. Deemar filed a federal lawsuit and, in April 2025, submitted a new complaint to OCR.Featuring:Kimberly Hermann, Executive Director, Southeastern Legal Foundation

E&I Host: Dennis Hyde, Category Marketing Manager, E&I Cooperative Services Guest: Adrienne Meador Murray, VP for Equity, Compliance, and Civil Rights Services at D. Stafford & Associates This podcast explores the sweeping changes in Title IX and Title VI enforcement under the new Trump administration, and what those changes mean for higher ed institutions across the country. From landmark Supreme Court decisions to evolving campus policies, we connect the legal history to the real-time challenges institutions now face regarding admissions, athletics, sexual misconduct, and diversity. As Title IX and Title VI increasingly intersect, the boundaries between them are becoming less clear, making compliance even more complicated. One of the most controversial shifts is the administration's strict, binary definition of sex, which removes federal protections for transgender students. Institutions that allow transgender women to participate in women's sports or use women's facilities are already facing new federal investigations. The return of the 2020 Title IX regulations adds another layer of complexity, strengthening protections for students accused of misconduct while limiting schools' responsibilities for off-campus incidents. The administration is also widening its scrutiny of colleges, beyond just the Ivy League. For higher ed leaders, these developments are forcing urgent reassessments of campus policies and civil rights compliance strategies in a rapidly changing landscape.Cooperatively Speaking is hosted by E&I Cooperative Services, the only member-owned, non-profit procurement cooperative exclusively focused on serving the needs of education. Visit our website at www.eandi.org/podcast.Contact UsHave questions, comments, or ideas for a future episode? We'd love to hear from you! Contact Cooperatively Speaking at podcast@eandi.org. This podcast is for informational purposes only. The views expressed in this podcast may not be those of the host(s) or E&I Cooperative Services.

The Congressional Budget Office now estimates that the “big beautiful bill” would add over $2 trillion to the national debt. Elon Musk is also escalating his criticism. However, the White House disputes those claims, insisting the agenda will cut spending and reduce the deficit.President Trump spoke by phone today with Russian President Vladimir Putin, following a series of high-profile Ukrainian attacks on Russian territory. Trump described the call as “a good conversation, but not a conversation that will lead to immediate peace.” He added that Putin “very strongly” indicated he would respond to the recent attacks on Russian airfields.Meanwhile, the Trump administration is taking action against Columbia University, alleging the school violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act by showing “deliberate indifference toward the harassment of Jewish students.” As a result, the administration says Columbia no longer meets the standards required by its accrediting body.

HARVARD: TITLE VI AND ENFORCEMENT. PETER BERKOWITZ, HOOVER, 1918 HARVARD COMMENCEMENT

Preview: Colleague Peter Berkowitz of Hoover Institution comments on the requirement for the Trump administration to follow rules for Title VI enforcement on Harvard and other universities. More later. 1910.

What if the recent crackdown on elite universities didn't start with Trump—but with Obama? In this episode, we trace a surprising through-line connecting Obama's Title IX enforcement to Trump's Title VI threats. Harvard Law Professor Jacob Gersen joins us to reveal how both presidents used informal bureaucratic tools to reshape higher education—often without Congress. What does this say about presidential power and academic freedom in America?Papers discussed:“The Sex Bureaucracy”: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2750143“The Six Bureaucracy”: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5199652

Residents question decision-making process After hearing parents criticize its decision-making process, the Haldane school board voted unanimously on Tuesday (May 6) to reinstate the district's Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policy. It had suspended the policy on April 22, fearful of losing $450,000 in federal funding threatened by the Trump administration's opposition to DEI programs. The board said it reversed course after federal judges in three jurisdictions on April 24 temporarily blocked the administration from cutting funding to schools that have what the White House characterizes as "illegal" practices. Six residents who spoke at the meeting expressed gratitude for the board's decision to reinstate the policy but also voiced frustration with how the initial decision was made. "I don't think the board is doing a good job of making those decision-making processes transparent to our community," said Paul Cummins, who has two children at Haldane. After the meeting, Peggy Clements, president of the five-member board, said the decision to suspend the policy happened "at a really fast and furious pace and certainly didn't allow for the careful consideration and outreach that we would ordinarily engage in." "This was nothing that any of us wanted to do," Clements said. "It did make us deeply uncomfortable. But we felt like the district was truly at risk of losing $450,000." During the meeting, Board Member Michelle Kupper said she regretted "not communicating more about the future of our Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policy months before the vote. A lot of us in the school community knew that the current presidential administration takes issue with diversity, equity and inclusion, and we should have been talking about how to handle it." Carl Albano, the interim superintendent, said the decision to suspend the policy on April 22 was rushed because of an April 24 deadline set by the Trump administration. In early April, the U.S. Department of Education ordered states to gather signatures from local districts certifying their compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as well as rejection of what the Trump administration calls "illegal DEI practices." The directive did not carry the force of law but threatened to use civil rights enforcement to rid schools of DEI practices. Schools were warned that continuing such practices "in violation of federal law" could lead to Justice Department litigation and the termination of federal grants and contracts. New York State responded that it would not comply. Despite that, Albano said that on April 11 the district's law firm, Shaw, Perelson, May & Lambert, recommended that the board certify compliance with Title VI. Many other districts did the same. At the time "we didn't see an issue certifying, because, again, we believe we are in compliance," Albano said. "None of that raised concern for me or the board." However, on April 18, "our attorney, after reviewing the DEI policy, had concerns about the diversity hiring provision," Albano said. That provision states: "The district will strive to create a workforce that is not only diverse and inclusive, but one that recognizes and values the differences among people. As part of this effort, the district will seek to (a) recruit and retain a diverse workforce in all areas and at all levels [and] (b) provide staff with opportunities for professional development on cultural responsiveness." Albano said that on April 22, just hours before the board was scheduled to meet, he gave members the attorney's recommended resolution to suspend the DEI policy because it "may, in part, be inconsistent" with the Department of Education's interpretation of Title VI. After suspending the DEI policy, the board certified compliance with Title VI. The Highland Falls-Fort Montgomery district, which includes O'Neill High School, which Garrison district students can attend, also voted last month to suspend its DEI policy. Halfway into its April 10 ...

On today's episode, we discuss recent developments in US Higher Education, including Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, and the new significance behind this case under the Trump Administration, as well as the "Dear Colleague" letters issued by the US Department of Education this year. Subscribe to our podcast today to stay up to date on employment issues from law experts worldwide.Host: Marcia DePaula (email) (Steptoe & Johnson PLLC)Guest Speaker: Derek Ishikawa (email) (Hirschfeld Kraemer LLP)Support the showRegister on the ELA website here to receive email invitations to future programs.

Jay Greene from the Heritage Foundation who is best known for being my New Trier High School debate partner. We also have Jon Zimmerman who is a Professor of History of Education at the University of Pennsylvania.Our focus will be on the Trump Administration's letter to Harvard demanding that the institution stop violating Title VI and protect the civil rights of its Jewish students and whether the letter is appropriate and reasonable.After recording the podcast, Harvard released a 311-page internal report on ongoing antisemitism on campus. And I have added a follow-up discussion with Jay on that report. Get full access to What Happens Next in 6 Minutes with Larry Bernstein at www.whathappensnextin6minutes.com/subscribe

Federal court rulings reassure board members The Haldane school board plans to reinstate the district's Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policy at its Tuesday (May 6) meeting, two weeks after suspending the standards in a bid to safeguard $450,000 in federal funding threatened by the Trump administration's opposition to DEI programs. The reversal came after federal judges in Maryland, New Hampshire and Washington, D.C., on April 24 temporarily blocked the administration from cutting funding to schools with what the White House characterizes as "illegal" practices. Those rulings occurred the same day the administration chose as the deadline for local school districts to certify they had eliminated DEI policies and operated in compliance with Title VI the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits racial discrimination in federally funded programs. The Haldane board also passed a resolution asserting the latter. A day later, New York and 18 other states filed a federal lawsuit challenging the certification requirement. They called the directive "unprecedented and unlawful," and said DEI initiatives actually support civil rights law. Haldane voted unanimously on April 22 to suspend its DEI policy pending "clarification of the conflict between the respective positions of the state and federal governments regarding Title VI and DEI," according to the resolution. On Wednesday (April 30), the district issued a statement that said its legal counsel had advised that the federal rulings could be interpreted to mean "there is no longer an imminent risk of losing funds." The statement said the board will reinstate the DEI policy "without modification and will continue to address all policy revisions through its standard review process." Carl Albano, the interim superintendent, said the five-member board made the decision after meeting in a closed session on Tuesday with Michael Lambert, its attorney from Shaw, Perelson, May & Lambert, which represents and advises many area districts. Haldane Statement On April 29, 2025, the Haldane Board of Education met in executive session with legal counsel from Shaw, Perelson, May & Lambert. Counsel advised that, based on the April 24, 2025, rulings by three federal court judges temporarily blocking the U.S. Department of Education from implementing and enforcing its Feb. 14, 2025, Dear Colleague Letter, the Feb. 28, 2025, Frequently Asked Questions and the April 3, 2025, certification requirement, there is no longer an imminent risk of losing Title funds related to the Title VI certification requirement. As a result, the Board intends to reinstate its Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policy at its May 6, 2025, meeting without modification and will continue to address all policy revisions through its standard review process. Read Haldane letter to community. "The board was surprised by the level of acrimony" from the community in response to its vote, said Peggy Clements, its president. "Many of us wish we had said more during and after the [April 22] meeting to explain that the suspension was temporary, that this was a difficult decision for us given our commitment to the aims of the policy, that we believed federal funding was truly at risk if we didn't act by April 24, and that we were making the decision because we believed that protecting the funds was in the best interests of students." Clement said that she and another board member will be at a Haldane PTA meeting scheduled for 6:30 p.m. on Monday (May 5) at the Butterfield Library in Cold Spring to answer questions about the DEI policy. Albano said that district residents told him they had hoped the board would take a more defiant stance, as Harvard University did when it refused changes demanded by the administration despite a threat to end $2.2 billion in federal grants and contracts. "We don't have a $53 billion endowment like Harvard," said Albano. The Haldane district has an annual budget of about $30 million. The $450,000 in feder...

Harvard University is taking legal action after the Trump administration froze $2.2 billion in federal grants, citing failure to address antisemitism and comply with vague new rules about “merit-based” practices and “viewpoint diversity.”The panel discusses the implications for academic freedom, student activism, and how terms like antisemitism may be misused to silence dissent. Is this a crackdown on hate or a political power play? News SourceAP News by Michael Casey, April 14, 2025https://apnews.com/article/harvard-trump-administration-federal-cuts-antisemitism-0a1fb70a2c1055bda7c4c5a5c476e18dThe Non-Prophets, Episode 24.17.2 featuring Jimmy Jr., Rob, Tracy Wilbert and The Ejector SeatTrump Freezes $2.2B in Harvard Grants Over Campus Protests

District cites legal advice, fear of losing funds The Haldane school board voted unanimously on Tuesday (April 22) to suspend its Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policy in hopes of safeguarding $450,000 in federal funding threatened by the Trump administration's opposition to DEI programs. The district's resolution suspended the policy "pending clarification of the conflict between the respective positions of the state and federal governments regarding Title VI [of the Civil Rights Act of 1964] and DEI." The five-member board also approved a resolution certifying compliance with Title VI, which prohibits racial discrimination in federally funded programs. The Trump administration had set a Thursday (April 24) deadline for local school districts to eliminate "illegal DEI practices" or potentially lose funding. However, on Thursday, a federal judge in New Hampshire temporarily blocked the administration's guidance forbidding DEI efforts in K-12 public schools. The ruling came in a lawsuit brought by the National Education Association and the American Civil Liberties Union, which accused the Republican administration of violating teachers' due process and First Amendment rights. On Friday, attorneys general from 18 states, including New York, sought a federal court order stopping the Department of Education from implementing the April 3 certification demand, calling it illegal and unconstitutional. In February, the U.S. Education Department told schools and colleges they needed to end any practice that differentiates people based on their race or they would risk losing their federal funding. Craig Trainor, the acting assistant secretary for civil rights, issued a "Dear Colleague" letter arguing that a Supreme Court decision in 2023 banning race-based college admissions extended to DEI policies in public schools. "DEI programs, for example, frequently preference certain racial groups and teach students that certain racial groups bear unique moral burdens that others do not," Trainor wrote. "Such programs stigmatize students who belong to particular racial groups based on crude racial stereotypes. Consequently, they deny students the ability to participate fully in the life of a school." Earlier this month, the department ordered states to gather signatures from local districts certifying compliance with civil rights laws, including rejection of what the federal government calls "illegal DEI practices." The directive did not carry the force of law but threatened to use civil rights enforcement to rid schools of DEI practices. Schools were warned that continuing such practices "in violation of federal law" could lead to U.S. Justice Department litigation and termination of federal grants and contracts. At least 15 states, including New York, said they would not comply with the federal order. "We understand that the current administration seeks to censor anything it deems 'diversity, equity & inclusion,'" wrote Daniel Morton-Bentley, a lawyer for the New York Education Department. "But there are no federal or state laws prohibiting the principles of DEI." He added also that the federal government had "yet to define what practices it believes violate Title VI." At Haldane, interim Superintendent Carl Albano called the federal dollars, which are used to educate students with disabilities, provide student lunches and fund other initiatives, "a significant amount of money" that "could be at risk if you keep these policies in place." He said that Haldane's legal counsel had advised suspending the DEI policy, at least temporarily. The district adopted its DEI policy in December 2022 in "recognition of the inherent value of diversity and acknowledgement that educational excellence requires a commitment to equity in the opportunities provided to students and the resulting outcomes." The policy noted that Haldane's mission is to prepare its students to succeed in "an ever-changing global society," a goal that requires incorporating a DEI l...

Our guests today signed onto a statement by a group of 18 law professors who opposed the Trump administration's funding threats at Columbia on free speech and academic freedom grounds.  Since then, Northwestern, Cornell, Princeton, Harvard, and nearly 60 other colleges and universities are under investigation with their funding hanging in the balance, allegedly for violations of civil rights law.  To help us understand the funding threats, Harvard's recent lawsuit against the federal government, and where universities go from here are: - David Rabban — distinguished teaching professor at The University of Texas at Austin School of Law - Erwin Chemerinsky — distinguished professor of law and dean at UC Berkeley Law Timestamps:  00:00 Intro 02:50 Govt's approach with Harvard and Columbia 05:39 Title VI violations 11:30 Anti-Semitism on campuses 23:02 Viewpoint diversity in higher education 27:12 Affirmative action and the Supreme Court 35:52 Title IX under the Obama and Biden administrations 42:32 Bob Jones University and tax-exempt status 45:53 Future of federal funding in higher education 54:08 Outro Enjoy listening to the podcast? Donate to FIRE today and get exclusive content like member webinars, special episodes, and more. If you became a FIRE Member through a donation to FIRE at thefire.org and would like access to Substack's paid subscriber podcast feed, please email sotospeak@thefire.org. Show notes: Academic freedom: from professional norm to first amendment right David Rabban (2024) Worse than nothing: the dangerous fallacy of originalism Erwin Chemerinsky (2022) “A statement from constitutional law scholars on Columbia” The New York Review (2025) Sweezy v. New Hampshire (1957) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act (1967) Federal government letter to Harvard (2025) “The promise of American higher education” Alan Garber (2025) Harvard's lawsuit (complaint) (2025) “Columbia agrees to Trump's demands after federal funds are stripped” The New York Times (2025) “Sustaining Columbia's vital mission” Claire Shipman (2025) Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College (2023) “What is Title IX? Its history & implications” FIRE (2025) Bridges v. Wixon (1945)

Washington Parents Network has filed a Title VI complaint against State Superintendent Chris Reykdal, alleging his DEI programs violate civil rights laws. DOJ investigations into multiple education-related violations may soon follow. Read more at https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/news/washington-parents-network-files-title-vi-complaint-against-state-superintendent-reykdal/ #localnews #ClarkCountyWa #ChrisReykdal #WashingtonParentsNetwork #TitleVI #DEI #educationrights #civilrights #OSPI

Julian Vasquez Heilig's blog, Cloaking Inequity, https://cloakinginequity.com/US Dept of Education "Dear Colleague" letter, February 14, 2025, https://www.ed.gov/media/document/dear-colleague-letter-sffa-v-harvard-109506.pdf US Dept of Education requesting districts certify compliance with Title VI, April 3, 2025, https://www.ed.gov/about/news/press-release/ed-requires-k-12-school-districts-certify-compliance-title-vi-and-students-v-harvard-condition-of-receiving-federal-financial-assistance Des Moines Register, Fearing federal DEI policies, Waterloo schools withdrew from African American reading event, March 12, 2025https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/local/2025/03/11/waterloo-schools-withdraw-african-american-read-in-trump-dei/81949713007/ NY State letter to US Dept of Education, rejecting request for district certification on DEI, April 4, 2025 https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25879984-040425-dmb-to-ocr-re-request-for-title-vi-certification/ District Administration, States now falling in line with DEI order; resistance remains, April 16, 2025https://districtadministration.com/article/one-big-state-is-vowing-to-defy-trumps-dei-order/ ACLU, Information about ACLU and NEA lawsuit challenging the Department of Education's Feb. 14, 2025, Dear Colleague Letter,https://www.aclu-nh.org/en/cases/nea-and-nea-nh-v-us-department-educationNAACP lawsuit, https://www.naacpldf.org/wp-content/uploads/001-Complaint-NAACP-v.-U.S.-Dept-of-Educ.-et-al_.pdf WMUR, Federal judge considering whether to stop enforcement of Dept. of Education letter regarding DEI policies, April 17, 2025https://www.wmur.com/article/new-hampshire-aclu-education-dept-dei-lawsuit/64515739 U.S. Department of Education press release, Letters to 60 Universities Under Investigation for Antisemitic Discrimination and Harassment, March 10, 2025 https://www.ed.gov/about/news/press-release/us-department-of-educations-office-civil-rights-sends-letters-60-universities-under-investigation-antisemitic-discrimination-and-harassment The Guardian, Columbia University caves to demands to restore $400m from Trump administration, March 21, 2025https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/21/columbia-university-funding-trump-demandsMichael Roth, NYT oped, Trump Is Selling Jews a Dangerous Lie, April 7, 2025,https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/07/opinion/trump-jewish-antisemitism-wesleyan.html Trump administration letter to Harvard threatening loss of funding, April 11, 2025https://www.harvard.edu/research-funding/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2025/04/Letter-Sent-to-Harvard-2025-04-11.pdfAlan Garber, Harvard President, The Promise of American Higher Education, April 14, 2025https://www.harvard.edu/president/news/2025/the-promise-of-american-higher-education/ Chronicle of Higher Education, These Faculty Senates Are Trying to Band Together to Stand Up to Trump, April 14, 2025https://www.chronicle.com/article/these-faculty-senates-are-trying-to-band-together-to-stand-up-to-trump ABC News, Trump admin freezes billions in funding to Harvard University after rejecting demands, April 15, 2025https://abcnews.go.com/US/harvard-university-rejects-trump-administrations-demands-risking-billions/story?id=120799115 Fortune, Harvard's defiance of Trump's ‘authoritarian incursion' supported by over 80 past and present college and university presidents, April 15, 2025 https://fortune.com/2025/04/15/harvard-defiance-trump-supported-college-university-presidents/?abc123 Bryan Alexander's blog, “The professors are the enemy”: J.D. Vance on higher education, July 18, 2024https://bryanalexander.org/politics/the-professors-are-the-enemy-j-d-vance-on-higher-education/

Higher education in the U.S. faces an unprecedented storm of political and financial upheaval, highlighting critical tensions around free speech, academic freedom, and institutional integrity. Columbia University's initial compliance with demands from the Trump administration—banning protest masks, revising protest policies, and ceding departmental autonomy—signals a troubling shift away from protecting academic freedom, but capitulation isn't the end of the story. Harvard University is resisting similar pressures, fiercely defending the right to independent scholarship against federal overreach under Title VI. Universities like Cornell, Northwestern, Johns Hopkins, and the University of Pennsylvania are grappling with massive financial disruptions impacting critical research and community programs.In K-12 education, similar tensions emerge: the past few weeks have brought DHS/ICE interventions in LA schools alongside Maine's successful pushback against federal interference in childhood nutrition programs. Even internationally, students at Netzaberg Middle School in Germany experienced what they perceived as administrative retaliation for peaceful protest, underscoring global stakes in educational autonomy.In lighter news, this week we are also catching up on Ohio's pending legislation around school cell phone use and the unresolved struggle over digital boundaries and mental health. Jonathan Haidt's recent conversations on The Ezra Klein Show highlight the ongoing challenge of balancing protective measures without regressing into outdated moral frameworks. For all of this and more, check out the latest episode. Thanks for listening.For a full list of episode sources and resources, visit our website at sixteentoone.com/archives.

It's Wednesday, April 16th, A.D. 2025. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard on 125 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com.  I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Jonathan Clark Christian lawyer highlights persecution of Christians in Egypt A lawyer with Alliance Defending Freedom International visited Egypt recently to highlight the persecution of Christians there. The country is about 10% Christian. That's the largest Christian minority in the Middle East and North Africa. However, believers often face persecution from the Muslim majority. Christians suffer employment discrimination, false accusations of blasphemy against Muhammad, sexual violence, and even bombing campaigns.  Elizabeth Brink with Alliance Defending Freedom noted, “Yet, in the face of such hardship, the courage and resilience of Egypt's Christian community are a powerful testament to the enduring hope of the Gospel.” Egypt is ranked 40th on the Open Doors' World Watch List of nations where it is most difficult to be a Christian.  Hungary bans events that celebrate sexual perversion On Monday, lawmakers in Hungary passed a constitutional amendment to ban events that celebrate sexually perverted lifestyles.  The amendment also recognizes only two sexes: male and female.  Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán supported the legislation, saying, “We won't let woke ideology endanger our kids. … We're protecting children's development, affirming that a person is born either male or female.”  Genesis 1:27 says, “So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.” Trump freezes $2.2 billion from Harvard over antisemitism In the United States, the Trump administration is taking on Harvard University.  The U.S. Department of Education announced Monday that it is freezing $2.2 billion in multi-year grants and $60 million in multi-year contract value to Harvard. This came after Harvard refused to comply with demands from the Trump administration. Those demands included ending its diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and screening students for issues like terrorism and anti-Semitism.  White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt spoke with passion at the press briefing. LEAVITT: “The President made it clear to Harvard, ‘Follow federal law. No longer break Title VI, which was passed by Congress, to ensure no student can be discriminated against on the basis of race, and you will receive federal funding. “Unfortunately, Harvard has not taken the President, the administration's demands seriously. “All the President is asking, ‘Don't break federal law, and then you can have your federal funding.'  “I think the President is also begging a good question. More than $2 billion out the door to Harvard when they have a more than $50 billion endowment. Why are the American taxpayers subsidizing a university that has billions of dollars in the bank already? And we certainly should not be funding a place where such grave antisemitism exists.” Kansas pro-life legislature overrode pro-abort governor's vetoes Republican lawmakers in Kansas overrode vetoes from Democrat Governor Laura Kelly last Thursday to pass several bills related to unborn children. One bill recognizes children as dependents from conception for child support programs. The second bill requires public school courses on human development or sexuality to include the development of a baby in the womb. And the third bill provides millions of dollars in funding for pro-life pregnancy centers.  Christian statesman new Ambassador-at-Large for religious freedom Last Thursday, President Donald Trump nominated Mark Walker as the U.S. Ambassador-At-Large for International Religious Freedom. Walker served as a U.S. House Representative for North Carolina's 6th congressional district from 2015 to 2021. Before working in politics, he served in pastoral roles at churches in Florida and North Carolina for 16 years. Listen to his advocacy of religious liberty not only here in America, but worldwide from the floor of the U.S. House back on July 24, 2015. WALKER: “Our commitment to allow people to live out their religious values, without fear of discrimination, is really the cornerstone that developed our country into a force for freedom. “But this liberty isn't just an American right. It should be a foundational element for all people groups. Ronald Reagan said it best. He said, ‘The most essential element of our defense of freedom is our insistence on speaking out for the cause of religious liberty.'” Walker thanked Trump in a post on X.  He wrote, “I'll be relentless in fighting for those targeted who dare to live out their faith. I'm grateful to my beautiful wife and family for their support. May God provide the path and may we have the courage to follow.” More Millennials are reading their Bibles The American Bible Society released the first chapter from their 2025 State of the Bible report. The study identified Bible users as those who read the Bible on their own at least three times a year. Forty-one percent of U.S. adults qualified as Bible users this year, up from 38% last year but down from 49% in 2019. Younger adults are leading the recent growth in Bible users. Thirty-nine percent of Millennials qualified as Bible users this year, up from 30% last year. Bible users are also increasing among Millennial and Gen X men in particular. Archeologists unearthed first Christian hymn captured in new film And finally, Christian music artists revived an ancient hymn last Friday ahead of Resurrection Sunday.  MOVIE NARRATOR: “Archeologists had no idea what they'd uncovered, an 1,800-year-old Christian hymn, the first to be discovered with words and music. It's not even a page, really. It's just 30 centimeters by 5 centimeters, but it provides amazing early evidence, not only of the beliefs and spread of Christianity, but also of its music.” The new recording is based on a papyrus discovered in Egypt in 1918. The manuscript dates from around the third century A.D. It's considered the earliest Christian song preserved with both words and musical notation.  John Dickson, a Christian historian, has worked to bring back the hymn since 2022, hosting a new documentary called “The First Hymn.”  Christian artists Chris Tomlin and Ben Fielding collaborated to release a recording of the ancient song. Here are some of the lyrics from the recording: “All powers cry out in answer. All glory and praise forever to our God, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Amen, we sing amen.” Colossians 3:16 says, “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.” Watch the trailer through a special link in our transcript today at www.TheWorldview.com.   You can stream “The First Hymn” movie on line for $15. Close And that's The Worldview on this Wednesday, April 16th, in the year of our Lord 2025. Subscribe for free by Amazon Music or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com. Or get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

Welcome to Season 5, Episode 15! When it comes to Supreme Court decisions that impacted the classroom, most people know about Brown v Board of Education. A lesser known landmark decision was also very impactful in schools across the U.S. We're talking about Lau v Nichols… a case that influenced the interpretation of Title VI and how U.S. schools needed to support second language learners to succeed in school. In this episode, we talk about the lead up to Lau v Nichols, what the impact of the Supreme Court decision was, and the lasting legacy of the decision. We also take time to address the rhetoric around the ending of the Department of Education and how it would impact not just Bilingual Education but how students are supported in the U.S. We begin the episode with a LOT of current events including growing anti-miscegenation-like decisions, Janet Yang, Alysa Liu, Caitlyn Chen, Te-hina Paopao, and Jonny Kim. We end with another installment of Weird History where we talk about the decision by Levi Strauss and Company to lean into anti-Chinese labor practices back in the late 1800s. If you like what we do, please share, follow, and like us in your podcast directory of choice or on Instagram @AAHistory101. For previous episodes and resources, please visit our site at https://asianamericanhistory101.libsyn.com or our links at http://castpie.com/AAHistory101. If you have any questions, comments or suggestions, email us at info@aahistory101.com. Segments 00:25 Intro and Current Events: Janet Yang, Jonny Kim, Kaitlyn Chen, Te-hina PaoPao, Alysa Liu 06:29 The History of Lau v Nichols and Bilingual Education in the U.S. 17:05 Weird History: Levi Strauss and Company and Anti-Chinese Labor

This Day in Legal History: First American Anti-Slavery Society OrganizedOn April 14, 1775, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, the first American society dedicated to the abolition of slavery was organized. Known as the Society for the Relief of Free Negroes Unlawfully Held in Bondage, it marked a critical early step in the formal anti-slavery movement in the United States. Among its key founders were Benjamin Franklin and Dr. Benjamin Rush, both prominent figures of the American Enlightenment and signers of the Declaration of Independence. The society was composed primarily of Quakers, whose religious convictions aligned with the idea that slavery was morally wrong and incompatible with Christian values.While its initial activities were limited, the group laid the groundwork for more organized and effective abolitionist efforts in the decades to come. In 1787, after the American Revolution, the society was reconstituted as the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery, with Franklin serving as its president. This reorganization gave the movement greater political clout and visibility. The society pushed for gradual emancipation, legal reforms, and the education and employment of freed Black individuals.Franklin's involvement lent substantial legitimacy to the cause, especially when he submitted a petition to the First Congress in 1790 calling for the federal government to take action against slavery. Although the petition was ultimately rejected, it sparked the first significant congressional debate over slavery in U.S. history. The 1775 founding of the original society represents a rare pre-Revolutionary acknowledgment of slavery's moral contradictions within the new American experiment. It also helped forge an early link between legal reform and moral advocacy, a tradition that would define much of the abolitionist movement in the 19th century.Meta Platforms, the parent company of Facebook, is set to face trial in Washington over allegations that it created an illegal monopoly by acquiring Instagram and WhatsApp. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) argues that these billion-dollar acquisitions were designed to eliminate emerging competition and solidify Facebook's dominance in the social media space. Filed in 2020, the case seeks to force Meta to sell off Instagram and WhatsApp, a move that would significantly impact the company's business, especially since Instagram alone is estimated to account for over half of its U.S. ad revenue.Meta's legal team has pushed back, calling the case weak and politically motivated. CEO Mark Zuckerberg is expected to testify, facing scrutiny over past emails where he framed the Instagram acquisition as a defensive move against competition. Meta argues that the market has since changed, with strong competition from TikTok, YouTube, and Apple's messaging services.The FTC claims Meta still dominates platforms for sharing content among friends and family, while alternatives like Snapchat and MeWe lack sufficient market presence. U.S. District Judge James Boasberg has allowed the case to proceed but acknowledged the FTC faces a tough road. The trial will run through July and, if the FTC prevails, a second trial will determine remedies like a forced breakup. The case is one of several targeting alleged monopolistic practices by major tech firms, including Google, Amazon, and Apple.Facebook owner Meta faces existential threat at trial over Instagram, WhatsApp | ReutersThe Trump administration has repeatedly accused immigrants of serious criminal ties—such as gang leadership or terrorism—without backing those claims with evidence in court. Presumably because they aren't interested in immediately perjuring themselves. One high-profile example involved the FBI's arrest of a Salvadoran man in Virginia, publicly labeled a top MS-13 leader and terrorist. Yet the Justice Department dropped the sole charge—illegal gun possession—and instead moved to deport him without pursuing gang-related allegations in court. A similar case involved Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was deported and later labeled a human trafficker, though no such charge appeared in legal filings. Officials also deported 238 Venezuelans alleged to be part of the Tren de Aragua gang, despite some having no criminal records. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem defended their imprisonment, citing national security, while declining to present supporting evidence. Legal experts caution that making unsupported public accusations risks undermining prosecutions and due process, as it can taint juries and violate Justice Department policy.Some judges have pushed back. U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis emphasized that serious accusations should be vetted through the legal system, not just made in press conferences. Meanwhile, other alleged MS-13 members were charged through traditional indictments, showing the DOJ still uses evidence-backed prosecutions in some cases. Critics say the administration's approach mixes law enforcement with political messaging, leveraging public fear to justify aggressive immigration actions.Trump officials push immigrant gang message, but sometimes don't back it up in court | ReutersA group of Harvard University professors has filed a lawsuit to stop the Trump administration from reviewing nearly $9 billion in federal grants and contracts awarded to the university. The lawsuit, brought by the Harvard chapter of the American Association of University Professors and its national organization, argues that the administration is unlawfully targeting the school to suppress free speech and academic freedom. The review was announced amid ongoing scrutiny of elite universities over pro-Palestinian protests, diversity programs, and transgender policies.Federal agencies including the Departments of Education and Health and Human Services, along with the General Services Administration, began investigating $255.6 million in contracts and $8.7 billion in multi-year grants. They demanded Harvard meet conditions to continue receiving funds, such as banning protester mask-wearing, eliminating DEI programs, cooperating with law enforcement, and revising departments allegedly involved in antisemitic harassment.The administration has cited Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination at federally funded institutions, as its legal basis. However, the plaintiffs argue that the government has not followed the proper legal process and is instead using funding threats to impose political viewpoints. Harvard law professor Andrew Crespo said the government cannot silence speech it disagrees with through funding leverage.Harvard professors sue over Trump's review of $9 billion in funding | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Where should the line be drawn between the government's role in stopping discrimination and a university's right to run itself? Today on Heterodox Out Loud, John Tomasi sits down with Joe Cohn, Policy Director at Heterodox Academy, to discuss the complexities of federal intervention in higher education.Cohn, a First Amendment expert, delves into the implications of recent federal actions, including those by the Trump administration, to combat anti-Semitism and enforce Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. They explore the tension between academic freedom and the necessity of preventing discrimination, examining specific cases of funding pauses and immigration enforcement actions. Cohn argues for procedural rigor in federal oversight to protect both institutional autonomy and individual rights, advocating for persuasion over censorship in addressing bigotry. In This Episode:

The EEOC has announced its intention to switch gears and focus on anti-discrimination protections to include portions of the PWFA final rules and employment laws against illegal preference of non-American workers over American workers under Title VI. In this episode Pandy talks about these directives as well as the guidance on Anti-Arab, Anti-Muslim and Antisemitic discrimination involving social media and workplace behaviors.

The Trump administration says at least 60 schools have violated Title VI for allowing antisemitism to flourish on campus. Critics see this effort as a way for the White House to clamp down on freedom of speech, and to punish left-leaning institutions. On this weekend episode, our reporters Helen Coster and Julia Harte unpack the fight over higher education in America. Sign up for the Reuters Econ World newsletter here. Listen to the Reuters Econ World podcast here. Visit the Thomson Reuters Privacy Statement for information on our privacy and data protection practices. You may also visit megaphone.fm/adchoices to opt out of targeted advertising. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The latest episode of dotEDU Live unpacks the sweeping layoffs at the Department of Education and their implications for colleges and universities. Hosts Jon Fansmith, Sarah Spreitzer, and Mushtaq Gunja are joined by ACE President Ted Mitchell to break down the budget battle in Congress, the department's restructuring, and the ripple effects on financial aid, student services, and institutional oversight.  The discussion also covers the Trump administration's ongoing investigations into higher education institutions, including Title VI enforcement actions and DEI-related scrutiny, as well as the shifting landscape for federal grant funding.   Send suggestions, links, and questions to @ACEducation on X or Bluesky or email podcast@acenet.edu. Here are some of the links and references from this week's show: Education Department Cuts Half Its Staff as Trump Vows to Wind the Agency Down The Associated Press | March 11, 2025 Statement by ACE President Ted Mitchell on Significant Layoffs at the Department of Education ACE | March 11, 2025  U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights Sends Letters to 60 Universities Under Investigation for Antisemitic Discrimination and Harassment Department of Education | March 10, 2025  Statement by ACE President Ted Mitchell Opposing the Trump Administration's Cancellation of Grants and Contracts to Columbia University ACE | March 10, 2025  Restoring Public Service Loan Forgiveness White House | March 7, 2025  Office for Civil Rights Initiates Title VI Investigations into Institutions of Higher Education Department of Education | March 14, 2025  OPINION: Here's Why We Cannot Permit America's Partnership with Higher Education to Weaken or Dissolve By ACE President Ted Mitchell The Hechinger Report | March 18, 2025 Trump Demands Major Changes in Columbia Discipline and Admissions Rules The New York Times (sub. req.) | March 13, 2025  Susan Collins Announces Reinstatement of University of Maine System's Paused USDA Funding Maine Public | March 12, 2025

We're rounding up and analyzing education news headlines this week on 16:1:The U.S. Department of Education is now half its former self—with 1,300 staffers gone and lawsuits brewing over what critics call a systematic gutting of civil rights protections. We're sorting through the challenges and exploring the fallout on public education.Arrests of Palestinian student activists at Columbia have raised fresh questions about academic freedom and the future of the United States' role in international scholarship. With visa crackdowns and a shaken reputation among U.S. universities, the stakes are higher than ever. Some European universities (like Aix Marseille) are offering safe haven to researchers leaving the U.S. due to concerns over academic freedom.We also take a look at Title VI investigations targeting diversity programs and the pushback by parents, students, disability advocates, and more.We're revisiting the Science of Reading with updates on how the literacy movement continues to reshape classrooms nationwide.For a full list of episode sources and resources, visit our website at sixteentoone.com/archives.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.serioustrouble.showFor all subscribers: we have a discussion of President Trump's jihad against Perkins Coie, and Long-Suffering Federal Judge Beryl Howell's lack of patience for it. And we talk about the arrest of green card-holder Mahmoud Khalil at Columbia University — and the efforts of the Trump Administration to expel him using little-used but very broad powers for the Secretary of State to expel aliens on the grounds that their presence would have “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States.”For paying subscribers:* The Trump administration's effort to revoke hundreds of millions of dollars in grants to Columbia, on the grounds that the university has violated Title VI.* Ed Martin's vague-yet-menacing letter to Georgetown Law School, saying he is conducting an “inquiry” into the school's alleged teaching of DEI. * Updates on multiple cases where government lawyers say something in court and Trump administration officials say something else online that undermines their case.* The advice Paul Clement gave Dale Ho about Eric Adams, how Sam Bankman-Fried got himself thrown into solitary confinement by giving a jailhouse interview to Tucker Carlson, and some tips on best practices for distributing a podcast from federal prison, whether or not you are George Santos.

It's been a rough week for the City Clerk's office. With investigations underway and its leader put on leave, City Cast Madison host Bianca Martin outlines the events that got us here. Speaking of investigations, executive producer Hayley Sperling gives the latest on a federal inquiry into alleged antisemitism at UW-Madison and other universities across the country. But it's not all bad news this week — our snowplows have names! Plus, newsletter editor Rob Thomas has the details on all the St. Paddy's Day fun happening this weekend in Madison. Sláinte! Mentioned on the show: Witzel-Behl placed on leave three weeks before spring election [Isthmus] UW-Madison update on Title VI complaint [UW-Madison] Federal Funding Cuts Could Be “Disastrous” for UW [

On Monday, Portland State University was among 60 universities under investigation for antisemitic discrimination and harassment by the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights.The warning issued by Secretary of Education Linda McMahon says schools like PSU could receive potential enforcement actions if they do not fulfill their obligations under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act to protect Jewish students on campus, including uninterrupted access to campus facilities and educational opportunities.“The Department is deeply disappointed that Jewish students studying on elite U.S. campuses continue to fear for their safety amid the relentless antisemitic eruptions that have severely disrupted campus life for more than a year. University leaders must do better,” said McMahon. “U.S. colleges and universities benefit from enormous public investments funded by U.S. taxpayers. That support is a privilege, and it is contingent on scrupulous adherence to federal anti-discrimination laws.”

In today's episode, we discuss two of the major federal statutes that relate to non-discrimination in higher education - Title IX and Title VI, including strategies that institutions can utilize during these shifting political winds. Subscribe to our podcast today to stay up to date on employment issues from law experts worldwide.Host: Marcia DePaula (email) (Steptoe & Johnson PLLC)Guest Speaker: Kate Nash (email) (Tueth Keeney Cooper Mohan Jackstadt P.C. / Eastern Missouri)Support the showRegister on the ELA website here to receive email invitations to future programs.

March 13, 2025 ~ The University of Michigan has received a warning from the Department of Education regarding Title VI compliance and the protection of Jewish students. Sarah Hubbard, University of Michigan regent, talks with Guy, Lloyd, and Jamie about how the university is addressing concerns for Jewish students in regard to harassment and balancing free speech with ensuring a respectful and inclusive campus environment.

The Department of Education has rolled out guidance on how it plans to enforce President Trump's recent EOs regarding "unlawful DEI." Although the guidance provides education institutions with some information regarding how to comply, many questions remain unanswered.   Chapters 00:00 Introduction to Organization Strategies 02:52 Understanding the New Department of Education Guidance 05:55 The Impact of Title VI on Higher Education 09:00 Admissions and the Essay Loophole 11:51 Curriculum and Academic Freedom 15:05 Protests and Free Speech on Campus 17:59 Compliance and Discriminatory Practices 20:53 Conclusion and Future Implications

Last week, three federal agencies — including the Department of Education — announced a comprehensive review of the funding relationships between the federal government and Columbia University in regards to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Like most universities, Columbia receives a great deal of federal funding. The Federal Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism, […]

Watch Call me Back on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CallMeBackPodcastTo contact us, sign up for updates, and access transcripts, visit: https://arkmedia.org/Dan on X: https://x.com/dansenorDan on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/dansenorLast week, three federal agencies — including the Department of Education — announced a comprehensive review of the funding relationships between the federal government and Columbia University in regards to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Like most universities, Columbia receives a great deal of federal funding. The Federal Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism, created by the Trump Administration, announced that it will visit 10 university campuses that have  seen a shocking rise in antisemitism since October 7, 2023.According to Education Secretary Linda McMahon, “Americans have watched in horror for more than a year now, as Jewish students have been assaulted and harassed on elite university campuses. Unlawful encampments and demonstrations have completely paralyzed day-to-day campus operations, depriving Jewish students of learning opportunities to which they are entitled. Institutions that receive federal funds have a responsibility to protect all students from discrimination. Columbia's apparent failure to uphold their end of this basic agreement raises very serious questions about the institution's fitness to continue doing business with the United States government.”According to Maya Sulkin in the Free Press, “even though Columbia formed a Task Force on Antisemitism weeks after Hamas's invasion of Israel on October 7, 2023, and issued two reports that revealed shocking instances of Jew hate on campus—not just among students but professors and administrators—the college has done little to root out the problem.”As a result, on Friday the Trump Administration announced the cancellation of $400 million in federal grants to  and contracts with Columbia. Following these developments, one could be left with the impression that higher education is doomed. Yetwe were struck by the reaction from the Call Me Back community to a conversation we had with the Chancellor of Vanderbilt University, Daniel Diermeier, last November, in an episode titled “How Vanderbilt University is getting it right.” It reminded us that some universities have impressively navigated the past 16 months.Vanderbilt is one of them. Another is Washington University. The Chancellors of both universities (Washington University Chancellor Andrew Martin and Vanderbilt's Diermeier) recently issued a set of principles that every university should be able to adopt. They summarized these principles in a piece in the Chronicle of Higher Education, titled: “Universities Must Reject Creeping Politicization.” You can read it here: There have been other universities, like the University of Michigan, which in the months after October 7, 2023 experienced massive disruptions. Yet according to conversations we have had with current Jewish students, the university administration has been doing much better than others. University of Michigan President Santa Ono has taken promising steps on a number of fronts, including the University's relationship with Israel, that could also serve as  a model.So, against the backdrop of chaos at Columbia and Barnard this past week, we sat down with WashU's Andrew Martin and Michigan's Santa Ono at the ADL's “Never is Now” Summit in New York City, for a candid conversation about what has happened at each of their universities, lessons learned, and charting a path forward. Additional items:ADL's Campus Antisemitism Report Card: https://www.adl.org/campus-antisemitism-report-card-Free Press reporting on Columbia University:https://www.thefp.com/p/exclusive-trump-administration-cancels-https://www.thefp.com/p/trump-columbia-antisemitism-federal-fundingCREDITS:ILAN BENATAR - Producer & EditorMARTIN HUERGO - EditorYARDENA SCHWARTZ - Executive Editor of Ark MediaGABE SILVERSTEIN - Research Intern YUVAL SEMO - Music Composer

At its March 4th meeting, Portland Public School board will hear an update on the Center for Black Student Excellence (CBSE). The $60 million CBSE was included in the bond measure approved by voters in 2020, without any prior due diligence. None of the money has been spent.It hasn't been spent because no one at PPS can explain what the Center is supposed to be or how it will improve academic performance. Nor has the Board clarified how a center focusing solely on Black students complies with Title VI of the 1964 U.S. Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race.None of those problems are solved in the Power Point being distributed for tonight's meeting.  The handout is a 9-page word salad of phrases like “Pages of Possibility” and “Bridges to Brilliance.” It does propose reading campaigns, parent partnerships, and mentoring programs that could benefit students of all races, but those activities do not require a dedicated building. The Board will be asking voters in May to approve another construction bond in the amount of $1.8 billion. Before demanding more money, PPS should apologize for its failure with the CBSE, and ask voters for permission to reallocate the $60 million to actual construction needs within the District.

Ken Stern (Director of the Bard Center for the Study of Hate) joins Amna and Jeff to discuss these urgent questions: Are campuses hotbeds of antisemitism? How do we define antisemitism in the first place? Is there a difference between antisemitism and anti-Zionism? How have colleges handled the student protests around Gaza? Why are so many higher education institutions facing Title VI lawsuits? What counts as a “hostile” campus environment? How should we educate students about the Israel/Palestine conflict? Show Notes* International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance Working Definition of Antisemitism* Kenneth Marcus, director of the Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, explains why universities and colleges should adopt the IHRA definition* Ken Stern, bio (Bard; Wikipedia); see also this New Yorker profile* Stern, The Conflict over the Conflict: The Israel/Palestine Campus Debate (University of Toronto Press, 2020)* Bard College Center for the Study of Hate* On quotas for Jewish students in higher education, see Jerome Karabel, The Chosen: The Hidden History of Admission and Exclusion at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton* Stern complements Wesleyan President Michael Roth for how he handled student protests—see Roth's New York Times op-ed from the fall of 2024, “I'm a College President, and I Hope My Campus Is Even More Political This Year”* Here is the poll that Stern mentions about how Jewish and Muslim students understand the phrase “from the river to the sea”* full text of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, including Title VI* 2004 “Dear Colleague” Letter on Title VI and Title IX Religious Discrimination in Schools and Colleges from the Office of Civil Rights * On how the Office of Civil Rights currently defines a “hostile environment,” see this 2023 “Dear Colleague” Letter on Shared Ancestry * Donald J. Trump, Executive Order on Combating Anti-Semitism, December 11, 2019* Here is the op-ed where Jared Kushner declares that “Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism”: “President Trump Is Defending Jewish Students,” New York Times, December 11, 2019* Donald J. Trump, Executive Order on Additional Measures to Combat Anti-Semitism, January 29, 2025. See also this White House “Fact Sheet” and Len Gutkin's dispatch on the E.O. in the Chronicle of Higher Education* The U.S. Department of Education maintains a list of pending Title VI cases here* Crimson coverage of Harvard's decision to adopt the IHRA definition available here and here* on publishing Mein Kampf in Germany in 2016 for the first time since World War II, see coverage in the Guardian here and here * On how Whitefish, Montana responded to a proposed march by white supremacists in 2016/17, see this New York Times article, “How a Small Town Silenced a Neo-Nazi Hate Campaign” * We have written several pieces on student activism and the War in Gaza—see:* “Colleges Are Cracking Down on Free Speech in the Name of ‘Inclusion'”* “Student Activism is Integral to the Mission of Academe” &* “Campus Protests Don't Undermine the College Mission”* The Chronicle of Higher Education has had some great coverage of the debates surrounding the IHRA definition; see here, here and here * on “hate speech” laws, see Nadine Strossen's superb 2018 book, HATE: Why We Should Resist it With Free Speech, Not Censorship* On the perils of confusing criticism of a government with attacks against a particular nationality, ethnicity or race, see this Chronicle Review piece about the censorship of a Chinese artist at George Washington University in 2022* For a data-driven analysis of the state of antisemitism in the U.S. on campuses and beyond, see this piece by Stony Brook University sociologist Musa al-Gharbi This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit banished.substack.com/subscribe

Many institutions are well acquainted with Title IX compliance but are less informed about adhering to other civil rights laws, like Title VI. Today, we are talking with Celeste Bradley, Chief Services Officer at Institutional Compliance Solutions (ICS), about the complexities of Title VI compliance and how to address discrimination based on race, color, or national origin. We discuss the contours of Title VI compliance, who it protects, its similarities to Title IX compliance, and important trends to be aware of regarding Title VI. Celeste breaks down key takeaways for schools to ensure they comply, like having an accessible reporting process, clear policies, training, tracking, language assistance, and immediate support in cases of discrimination. We also discuss broader jurisdictional concerns around Title VI enforcement before learning how ICS helps schools comply with Title VI, ensuring fair treatment and access to education for all students. For an in-depth discussion on the intricacies of Title VI compliance, be sure to tune in! Key Points From This Episode: Introducing today's guest, Celeste Bradley, ICS's new Chief Services Officer. ICS services and a behind-the-scenes look at what Celeste does operationally for ICS. An overview of Title VI: discrimination based on race, color, or national origin. How ICS assists with Title IX compliance and other civil rights laws, like Title VI. The importance of having a process for reporting and handling complaints under Title VI. How climate surveys can help schools understand and address issues affecting students. Broader jurisdictional issues and trends around Title VI enforcement. Why schools need to provide language assistance to students with limited English proficiency. How to put an effective system in place to track patterns and trends. A reminder of key steps like collecting evidence and offering support. What to expect from the ICS process and support on Title VI compliance. Links Mentioned in Today's Episode: ICS Lawyer Celeste Bradley on LinkedIn Power Up Product ManagementTitle IX Year-End Review Webinar with Steven RichardEpisode 65: 2025 Is Here: Reflections, Announcements, and What's Next for ICS! Higher Ed Community Access K-12 Community Access Higher Ed Virtual Certified IX Training K-12 Virtual Certified Title IX Training ICS Blog Courtney Bullard on X  Learn about Becoming a Community Partner

We were thrilled to have the opportunity to talk to PEN America's Jeremy Young about what a second Trump administration holds in store for higher education. It was an informative—and sobering—conversation. Over the next four years, we should be prepared for a tsunami of ideologically-driven threats to academic freedom, campus free expression and the basic integrity of higher education. If you would rather read than listen, there is a transcript attached below. Show NotesPEN America's *Educational Censorship* page is a terrific resourceOn Christopher Rufo, see Benjamin Wallace-Wells, “How a Conservative Activist Invented the Conflict Over Critical Race Theory,” New Yorker, June 18, 2021 and Michael Kruse, “DeSantis' Culture Warrior: ‘We Are Now Over the Walls,'” Politico, March 24, 2023. For Rufo's take on critical race theory, in his own words, see this YouTube video. Here is the full text of Executive Order 13950, which became the template for most of the anti-CRT (or “divisive concepts”) laws passed in red states. On the Stop WOKE Act, the marquee anti-CRT law signed into law by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis in 2022, check out these two Banished episodes:The Sunshine State Descends into Darkness (Again)Will Florida's "Stop WOKE Act" Hold Up in Court?Jeffrey Sachs and Jeremy Young predict the future: “For Federal Censorship of Higher Ed, Here's What Could Happen in 2025” (PEN America, January 2, 2025)For more on the phenomenon of “jawboning,” see this page from FIRE and this page from the Knight First Amendment Institute On “anticipatory obedience,” see this excerpt from Timothy Snyder's 2017 book, On Tyranny On legislative challenges to campus DEI, see the Chronicle of Higher Education DEI Legislation Tracker. (We are quite skeptical of many conventional DEI efforts but state bans are a cure that is far worse than the disease )For a deeper dive on accreditation, see Eric Kelderman, “Trump's Vision for College Accreditation Could Shake Up the Sector” (Chronicle of Higher Education, November 26, 2024)On Title VI investigations by the Office of Civil Rights, see Zach Montague, “Campus Protest Investigations Hang Over Schools as New Academic Year Begins” (New York Times, October 5, 2024)Here is the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism. Kenneth Stern, one of the definition's main authors, explains why he is concerned it is being used to promote campus censorshipOn the prospect of a much heftier endowment tax for the country's wealthiest institutions, see Phillip Levine, “How Trump Could Devastate Our Top Colleges' Finances” (Chronicle of Higher Education, January 13, 2025). Levine addresses the normative question—should college endowments be taxed?—here. TranscriptJeff: So, we're looking forward to a second Trump administration.Jeremy: Are we looking forward to a second Trump administration?Amna: No…towards.Jeff: We are anticipating…I personally am dreading a second Trump administration.Amna: This is Banished and I'm Amna Khalid, along with my colleague Jeff Snyder. Jeff and I were delighted to have the chance to catch up with PEN America's Jeremy Young at the recent American Historical Association conference in New York City. He's one of the most informed and astute analysts of government driven censorship in higher education today. We started by asking him to tell us a little about PEN America.Jeremy: PEN America is a 102 year old organization that exists at the intersection of literature and human rights. It is one of 140 PEN centers around the world which are in a loose network of PEN Centers governed by PEN International. PEN America's mission is to celebrate literature and defend the freedoms that make it possible, of which two of the foremost are academic freedom and freedom of expression.Amna: And what's your specific role?Jeremy: I am the Director of State and Higher Education Policy at PEN America, which means that I oversee our Freedom to Learn program, which leads actions and responses to educational censorship legislation, largely from the state governments, but also from the federal government. Things like DEI bans, critical race theory restrictions, and various other types of restrictions on faculty governance and university autonomy.Amna: We're eager to hear your predictions on what the higher ed sector should be bracing for with the second Trump administration. But first, Jeremy, could you please remind us of the nature of the attacks against higher education during Trump 1.0?Jeremy: In the summer and fall of 2020, this really happened late in the first Trump administration, there was a national panic around critical race theory, and this was created by Chris Rufo and some others really as a response, a backlash, if you will, against the George Floyd protests, the Black Lives Matter movement, the popularity of the 1619 Project, and so on, this sort of moment of racial reckoning. And so Rufo and others (Rufo is a fellow at the Manhattan Institute) decided to use this term critical race theory, which of course is an academic term with a particular set of meanings but to, as he put it, decodify and recodify it, essentially weaponize it to mean things that weren't all that connected to the actual theory of critical race theory and were really just a sort of catchall for criticisms of DEI and other race-based pedagogies and ideas. And so Rufo was able to convince president Trump to issue an executive order 13950 called Race and Sex Stereotyping that laid out a list of nine divisive concepts which bore some passing resemblance to critical race theory, but really were vague, and general, and banned all sorts of practices related to race, gender, and identity, and ideas related to race, gender, and identity that were unclear and difficult to interpret. Originally, this was a restriction aimed solely at trainings in government agencies…the executive order never went into effect. It was stayed by a court and repealed on the first day of the Biden administration. But that language of the divisive concepts then began to appear in state legislatures aimed now squarely at education. At first, at K-12 institutions primarily, and over time, higher education became more and more of the target.In 2023, we started to see a shift toward sort of broad spectrum attacks on higher education, moving away from some of the direct speech restrictions of the critical race theory bans, in part because of court cases that had gone adversely for those restrictions, and instead restricting broad swaths of university governance, including DEI offices, the ability of a university to manage diversity work on its own as a sort of shared governance function, tenure restrictions on faculty governance, restrictions on curriculum, which I think are going to be very prominent in 2025.Amna: You mentioned backlash to the 2020 racial reckoning as a key factor driving the anti-CRT movement. Can you say something more about where this opposition to CRT and now DEI is coming from?Jeremy: I think that there are several causes that are inseparable from one another. I think there are people who actually do want to restrict those particular ideas on campus, who want to advance a sort of triumphalist Western canon narrative of America as the victor, and they're just very opposed to any discussions that paint the United States in any way that is not hyper-patriotic and perfect. There's absolutely some racism, some sexism, some, some discrimination, discriminatory bias that's involved.I also think that there is a real desire to simply crush university power that I think comes out of the educational realignment that we have seen over the last 10 years. Kamala Harris won college educated Americans by 14 points, and four years ago, Joe Biden won them by four, and prior to the 2016 election, there was essentially no difference between the parties, really, at any time in American history on the axis of college education. There is now a sense I think among some conservative forces that instead of the long-time conservative project of reforming universities, having more viewpoint diversity, think of the Koch Centers in various institutions. Instead they're a place where liberals go to get educated, so we should just crush them, right? So I think that's part of it. It's just the goal of taking away universities' autonomy on everything is a key component.And the third component is political gain. And that is the one that has fluctuated the most over this period. Glenn Youngkin won a come from behind victory running on criticizing critical race theory in K-12 schools. And Steve Bannon said in 2021, I think about critical race theory and I see 50 new House seats in the midterm elections. Now, when that didn't happen, I think it began to become clear that these attacks are not as salient as they were thought to be. I think in 2023 and 2024, there was a real move away from that, especially with, also with the collapse of the DeSantis presidential campaign, which was built entirely around this idea of him being, fighting the war on woke. There was a sense that, maybe you still want to do these things, but now it's going to be quiet, it's going to be stealth mode, because there's no political gain to be gotten from having a big press release around this, around the Stop WOKE Act. But the other two motivations, the motivation of restricting certain ideas about race; and the motivation of smashing the power of higher education, those have remained constant.Jeff: Very succinct and helpful. Thank you. You and your colleague Jeffrey Sachs recently wrote an informative and sobering piece about Trump's plans for higher ed in 2025 and beyond. Maybe you could tell us a little about your key predictions. The first one you mention is jawboning. What is jawboning and why should we be worried about it?Jeremy: Jawboning, put simply, is when government officials, instead of passing a law requiring someone who isn't a government official to do something, they simply browbeat or bully or threaten them into doing it. In some ways you can look at the congressional hearings as a form of jawbonings or making threats against presidents at Columbia and Harvard and so on. But the classic example is actually what we're seeing at the state level where lawmakers are simply going to university presidents and say, saying, okay, we're not going to pass a DEI ban or a curriculum restriction. We're going to simply request that you make one on your own or we'll cut your funding. Or we'll pass one next year that's worse than anything you could imagine. It's a very intimate form of censorship, right? It takes restrictions out of the legislative process where they can be challenged at a hearing; out of the judicial process where they can be challenged on constitutional grounds; and every single one of these bills has at least some constitutional infirmities. And instead makes it just a threat, right? We're gonna cut your budget. What are you gonna do about that? It's a very difficult position for presidents to be in because they don't have a lot of leverage.Jeff: I think it was Yale historian Timothy Snyder who coined the term anticipatory obedience.  He said it was a dynamic that's often seen under conditions of rising authoritarianism. So you've got individuals and groups that start to make concessions they think will appease the powers that be. Is there a connection here to jawboning?Jeremy: Yes, so we talk about over compliance and pre-compliance. We're not going to comply with the letter of the law, we're going to comply with the spirit of the law. There is a law in Alabama that passed in 2024 that restricts some elements of DEI, but does not actually ban outright the DEI offices. And every university in Alabama has treated it as though it is an outright ban. And that's significant, in particular, because of the nature of these laws. You know, you go look at a set of statutes in a state legislature or the federal government, what you'll notice is that most laws are very precise. Think about traffic laws. What are you allowed to do on the road? It's very specific. You can drive this many miles an hour this particular way. There's no room for interpretation. There's no room for judgment because the goal is to make you comply with the law. These laws are intentionally vague. They ban broad swaths of ideas which are never defined in the laws.What does it mean to say, for instance, one of the divisive concepts, to say that you're not allowed to say that the United States is fundamentally racist. What does that mean? It doesn't say in the law what that means. It's left up to your interpretation, which means whoever is going to enforce that law gets to decide whether you violate it. That is actually a constitutional violation. It's against the 14th Amendment. And while the courts have found all sorts of infirmities with these laws, that's the one they've found the most consistency. Not freedom of speech, not racial discrimination but vagueness. So over-complying with a vague law is, it's difficult to avoid because these laws lend themselves to over-compliance because they're so vague. But it's also vitally important to avoid doing that.The other thing that we see is pre-compliance, which is just imagining that the legislature is going to pass a law but then whether or not they do it. We intervened with the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, one of the seven accrediting bodies because they were basically enacting what a restriction in Project 2025 that would have forbidden them to have a DEI standard for universities they accredit. And just doing it preemptively.It's not clear whether the education department is able to pass that restriction without legislation. And it's not clear whether legislation or the regulation would survive a court challenge. And they're just saying we'll just take it out. That's pre-compliance. You don't want to do that. And what we argued successfully, is that, again, even if you don't think an accreditor should have a DEI standard, we don't take a position on that. The worst time to get rid of your DEI standard is one month before a new administration that's promised to ban it tells you to. That's the moment when you put up your back and say, no, we're not going to comply with this.Jeff: Jeremy, tell us a little bit more about the new Trump administration's plans to disrupt the conventional work of accreditors.Jeremy: So higher education institutions are accredited by one of seven accrediting bodies, six of which have historically served certain regions, but now under new federal regulations the university can work with any of the seven accreditors. But they still tend to be concentrated in regions.Accreditation is really the only thing that separates a real substantive university from a diploma mill; and the way that accreditation is enforced, is that the Department of Education will only provide federal student financial aid, which 55 percent of all students receive, to schools that it recognizes as legitimate accreditors, which currently is those seven institutional accreditors. They are private or nonprofit organizations. They're run by academics. They have their pluses and minuses, but they are pretty much the guarantor of institutional quality in higher education. And if you look at Project 2025, everything that they say they want to do to higher education is focused on accreditation. They have identified these accreditors as the soft underbelly of higher education. And the simplest thing that they want to do and that they probably will at least try to do is to ban accreditors from having DEI standards, of which six of the seven currently do.But they really want to go further. What they really want to do is to undermine the system of accreditation itself by allowing any jurisdiction, any state, to either charter its own accreditor or serve as its own accreditor. So Ron DeSantis could become the accreditor for all universities in Florida. And now instead of those universities having DEI offices, he can say you cannot be accredited in the state of Florida unless you've banned DEI and basically instituted a classical curriculum, a Hillsdale style classical curriculum. It's a little more complicated than project 2025 makes it sound. Our analysis is that while they may attempt to do it through regulatory action, the process of negotiated rulemaking in the Department of Education is sufficiently complex that it would probably stop them from doing it and so that probably means that they need legislation to change the Higher Education Act, which would be subject to a filibuster.So this is something that we will be watching to see if they try to do it administratively. It may not be possible. And we'll also be watching if they try to slip it into one of those reconciliation bills that are being proposed that would be able to go through without a filibuster.Jeff: So that's how the accreditation system might be weaponized. You and Sacks also identify Title VI enforcement by the Office of Civil Rights as a key area of concern. Maybe we can break this down into its component parts. What is the Office of Civil Rights and what's Title VI?Jeremy: Sure. So the Office of Civil Rights is an office within the Department of Education that ensures that educational institutions meet the requirements of the various civil rights laws. It covers Title VI funding, which is funding that is tied to financial aid for universities, and it makes sure that institutions that are receiving federal financial aid are following these civil rights protections. It is an office does good work and we have a good relationship with the office.We have some concerns about the way that the Biden administration has been investigating and enforcing agreements with universities around antisemitism. We expect things to get far worse in the new administration. We expect that any university that has any sort of protest or any faculty member who expresses pro-Palestinian views is going to be investigated and sanctioned by the Office of Civil Rights. We expect they're going to launch lawsuits. They're going to really go after universities. So it is an office that is going to be used in some really aggressive ways to restrict speech on campus.Jeff: In terms of restricting speech, you and Sachs are especially worried about the trend on the part of colleges and universities, not to mention states and the federal government, to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism. Why is this so concerning to you both?Jeremy: So the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism is a very interesting document. It starts with a description that is quite thoughtful and then it gives a list of examples of things that could be forms of antisemitism or could accompany antisemitism, and that list includes things like singling out the state of Israel for special criticism that other states are not singled out for that do engage in the same actions or just you know criticizing Zionism, things like that. Which in the context of what that definition was designed for yes, sometimes when you see those statements, it's worth perking your ears up and asking, is this accompanying antisemitism or not?What the laws are doing, and this comes from a model bill that the Goldwater Institute wrote in 2016, and it's now being suffused into all these federal and state policies, is to take those examples of possible antisemitism and change it from possible to definite antisemitism. So anytime you criticize the state of Israel, it's antisemitism. And then writing that into law, saying that universities have to treat this as any instance of this broad definition of antisemitism as hate speech or as a form of harassment. The author of that definition, Kenneth Stern has repeatedly said that it is not designed to be used in that way. In fact, he said it's unconstitutional to use it in that way. And yet that's what we're seeing. So that's the concern. It's not that you shouldn't have a definition of anti Semitism, although I will say our statutes tend not to define particular types of hate speech because it's too subjective, right? This is the reason that we have definitions like severe, pervasive, and targeted for harassment. You're looking at a pattern of behavior because each individual case is protected by free expression.Jeff: I understand that the Office of Civil Rights is currently conducting dozens of Title VI investigations stemming from campus protests over the war in Gaza. There are widespread allegations of antisemitism, many of which are accompanied by competing charges of Islamophobia. How do you think we should make sense of this?Jeremy: These are complex situations. Lots of universities are getting them wrong. Some universities are being overly censorious, some not enforcing harassment protections. And it's right and proper for OCR to investigate these things. The problem is that they are not always coming up with the right findings. That they're not always protecting free expression, balancing free expression adequately with the need to protect students from harassment. We're seeing universities implement draconian time, place and manner restrictions on speech. So just the fact that OCR and the Congress are making all these threatening noises about restricting speech leads a lot of universities to do the censor's work for them.Amna: Jeremy mentioned one other thing the new Trump administration has made ramblings about, which is ramping up the endowment tax on the country's wealthiest institutions. Please see an informative Chronicle of Higher Education article by Philip Levine, linked in the show notes.What all these attacks or interventions, depending on your point of view, have in common, is that they seek to undermine the autonomy of colleges and universities. Here's Jeremy.Jeremy: University autonomy is not a principle that is very widely understood in the United States. It's much more common in Europe where there's an autonomy index and all sorts of things as a way of protecting academic freedom. But it's a vital component of academic freedom. We think about academic freedom in the U.S. primarily as being the freedom of an individual faculty member to speak their mind or to engage in their research or teaching. But, in reality, that freedom can only be protected so long as the people overseeing it, the university administration, are free from the ideological control of the government. The key here is ideological control. We aren't saying that the government doesn't have a budgetary responsibility to oversee the university, or that there isn't a role for the government in community relations, or student success, or access and completion, or any of these things. But when it comes to ideas, what ideas can be present on a campus, whether it's in the classroom, whether it's in a DEI office, anywhere on campus, that is not the government's business, and it cannot be the government's business, or ultimately everyone on campus is simply going to be currying favor with whatever political party is in charge.Amna: Jeremy, this has been wonderful and you've been so kind to give us so much time. Thank you.Jeff: Thank you. It's an absolute pleasure.Amna: That was our conversation with Jeremy Young of PEN America on what Trump 2.0 portends for higher education. As of yesterday, Trump's second term has officially begun. Keep your eyes peeled and ears tuned for what's to come next. If you liked what you heard today, be sure to help us spread the word about Banished, and don't forget to comment and rate this show.Once again, this is Banished, and I'm Amna Khalid, along with Jeff Snyder. Until next time. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit banished.substack.com/subscribe

"From the Frontlines" is an ADL podcast which brings listeners to the frontline in the battle against antisemitism and hate. In the one-year period from October 7, 2023 to October 7, 2024, ADL tracked and responded to more than 10,000 incidents of antisemitism across the country. That is approximately 3 times the highest number of incidents ever recorded since ADL began tracking these reports in 1979. The highest percentage increase took place on our college campuses, and Title VI claims have become a critical tool in the battle against antisemitism and other forms of hate on those campuses. A few weeks ago, under the auspices of ADL's activist group in Westchester, New York, these three distinguished panelists discussed this important topic: 1. Rachel Grinspan, ADL's Associate General Counsel 2. Rachel Klein, Executive Director of Hillels of Westchester, and 3. Michael Scheffler, Counsel for Hillels of Westchester and a partner at the law firm of Blank Rome. This is an edited version that was created for the podcast audience. For more information on how ADL fights antisemitism on campus using Title VI, visit https://www.adl.org/adl-national-litigation#antisemitism_and_hate_schools_universities_litigation. For more on ADL's broader resources to fight antisemitism on campus, visit https://notoleranceforantisemitism.adl.org/ This conversation was originally conducted as a webinar in December 2024.

This Day in Legal History: Wyoming Territory SuffrageOn December 10, 1869, the Wyoming Territory made history by enacting the first law in the United States to grant women the right to vote. Signed into law by Governor John A. Campbell, the legislation represented a bold step toward gender equality in a country where voting rights for women were otherwise non-existent. This groundbreaking decision was influenced by a mix of progressive ideals and pragmatic concerns. Some lawmakers supported the measure as a genuine effort to recognize women's rights, while others believed it might attract settlers to the sparsely populated territory.The law not only granted women the right to vote but also allowed them to hold public office, a rarity even in international contexts at the time. The first woman to serve on a jury in the U.S. would soon do so in Wyoming, and Esther Hobart Morris became the first female justice of the peace in 1870, further cementing Wyoming's legacy as a leader in women's rights.Although Wyoming's population was small and its territorial status meant it didn't have full representation in Congress, the move set a precedent that fueled the broader suffrage movement. When Wyoming sought statehood in 1890, it faced pressure to revoke women's voting rights, but the state stood firm, famously declaring it would remain out of the Union rather than sacrifice women's suffrage. This early commitment earned Wyoming its nickname, the "Equality State."By taking this step in 1869, Wyoming paved the way for the eventual passage of the 19th Amendment in 1920, which extended voting rights to women across the United States. Wyoming's decision remains a landmark moment in the history of democracy and gender equality in America.President-elect Donald Trump's administration is expected to target diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs in businesses and universities, arguing that such policies violate anti-discrimination laws. The Justice Department under Trump plans to investigate and potentially litigate against these practices, framing them as unlawful discrimination. Trump's nominee to lead the Civil Rights Division, Harmeet Dhillon, has a record of opposing "woke" corporate policies. The administration may leverage Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act to challenge federally funded programs that consider race in decision-making, including university admissions and healthcare equity initiatives. Legal challenges to DEI efforts could also arise from private lawsuits, some of which have already been dismissed due to lack of standing. Conservative groups, such as America First Legal, have intensified pressure on corporations to dismantle diversity initiatives, often citing laws historically intended to protect marginalized communities. Critics argue this approach undermines the mission of civil rights laws, which were designed to address systemic inequities affecting underrepresented groups. Proponents of DEI programs contend they are crucial for addressing structural racism and promoting equitable opportunities. However, the threat of government scrutiny may prompt some companies to scale back their diversity commitments, as seen recently with Walmart and JPMorgan Chase. Legal experts note that while many DEI policies may withstand legal challenges, the broader campaign against them reflects a contentious debate over equity, merit, and the role of government in addressing societal disparities.DOJ v. DEI: Trump's Justice Department likely to target diversity programs | ReutersThe bankruptcy court hearing over Alex Jones' Infowars platform began with heated accusations, including claims of "voodoo economics" from Jones' attorney. The trustee overseeing the bankruptcy has chosen The Onion's corporate parent, Global Tetrahedron LLC, as the preferred bidder with a $7 million offer, which includes waived claims by Sandy Hook families against sale proceeds. Competing bidder First United American Cos., offering $3.5 million in cash and plans to keep Infowars operational, argues its bid is more substantial, calling The Onion's bid inflated and misleading.The sale aims to liquidate Jones' assets to address $1.3 billion in judgments related to his false claims about the Sandy Hook shooting. The Onion plans to replace Infowars with a new platform by January 2025, in collaboration with Everytown for Gun Safety. The Sandy Hook families' participation in boosting The Onion's bid has been criticized by Jones' team as manipulative.Meanwhile, social media accounts associated with Infowars on X (formerly Twitter) were excluded from the sale after X Corp. asserted ownership of the handles. The court has yet to decide who will take control of Infowars, with testimony expected to continue.Alex Jones Lawyer Accuses Onion of ‘Voodoo Economics' in CourtNew York prosecutors have charged Luigi Mangione, 26, with murder in the shooting of UnitedHealth executive Brian Thompson, concluding a five-day manhunt. Mangione was arrested in Altoona, Pennsylvania, after being spotted at a McDonald's. Upon his capture, police found a "ghost gun" matching the weapon used in the crime, along with masks, cash, false IDs, and a handwritten manifesto expressing hostility toward corporate America. Mangione is also facing forgery and gun charges in Pennsylvania, where prosecutors successfully argued to deny him bail.Thompson, 50, was killed outside a Manhattan hotel, in what authorities believe was a targeted attack. Surveillance footage showed the suspect fleeing on a bike, later boarding a bus out of the city. Investigators are probing whether others were also targeted. Shell casings at the scene were inscribed with the words "deny," "defend," and "depose," referencing a book critical of the insurance industry.Mangione, a Maryland native and Ivy League graduate, had a documented history of academic excellence but harbored grievances against corporate entities. Thompson's murder has fueled public frustration over the insurance industry, though officials, including Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, have condemned any glorification of the act. Thompson, a longtime UnitedHealth executive and father of two, was in New York for an investor conference at the time of his death.Suspect in killing of UnitedHealth executive Brian Thompson charged with murder | ReutersTexas exemplifies the need to condition federal aid on state tax reform, especially as federal debt grows and economic inequities deepen. While Texas touts its business-friendly, low-tax environment, this model relies heavily on regressive taxes that disproportionately burden lower- and middle-income residents. The state's avoidance of personal and corporate income taxes forces reliance on property taxes—among the nation's highest—and sales taxes, both of which hit poorer Texans hardest. Compounding the inequity, Texas receives significant federal funding, partly financed by taxpayers in higher-tax states like California. This dynamic effectively subsidizes Texas' low-tax model at a national cost. The state's tax policies create a paradox: wealthy individuals and corporations enjoy the benefits of Texas' infrastructure and services while avoiding proportional contributions, with federal taxpayers covering the shortfall. This system also distorts interstate competition, incentivizing migrations to low-tax states and exacerbating national fiscal inequities. As population growth and climate challenges strain Texas' regressive tax system, federal policymakers may need to condition aid—such as disaster relief or infrastructure grants—on reforms that promote equity and fiscal sustainability.Texas Shows Why Federal Aid Should Be Tied to State Tax Reform This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

It's “Nutcracker” season — but given the upheaval at Metro Arts, we need to talk about more than just the Sugar Plum Fairy. Host Marie Cecile Anderson is joined by Nick Mullikin, Artistic Director and CEO of the Nashville Ballet; Asia Pyron, director and choreographer of PYDANCE; and Sarah Atenhan, president and artistic director of Satellite Dance. They'll discuss their current projects, their passion for broadening dance access in Nashville, and unpack how the Metro Arts chaos — and insufficient arts funding in general — is impacting their work. Nashville Ballet's “Nutcracker” is running now through Dec. 26. Get tickets here. “God's Country” by PYDANCE is Jan. 17, 2025 at TPAC. Get tickets here.  Follow Satellite Dance on Instagram here. Further reading on the Metro Arts debacle: A timeline of events from Dec. 2022 to March 2024 Deep dive into the fallout from the 2023 change in funding mechanism The Title VI discrimination complaint filed by artists against Metro Arts  Metro Human Relations Commission report after investigation of Title VI complaint* Conciliation agreement August 2024 update on events following conciliation agreement *City Cast executive producer Whitney Pastorek is an MHRC commissioner and voted in favor of the conciliation agreement Want some more City Cast Nashville news? Then make sure to sign up for our Hey Nashville newsletter.  Follow us @citycastnashville You can also text us or leave a voicemail at: 615-200-6392⁩ Interested in advertising with City Cast? Find more info HERE.  Learn more about the sponsor of this Dec. 9th episode: United Way of Greater Nashville

Following the Oct. 7, 2023, massacre in Israel, universities throughout America experienced a sharp rise in hostility toward Jews.“I have lost every single non-Jewish friend I had at Harvard—every single one,” said student activist Shabbos Kestenbaum.A proud Orthodox Jew and a former self-described “die-hard liberal,” Kestenbaum endorsed Donald Trump and voted Republican for the first time in his life, believing that the Democratic Party had systematically abandoned Jewish Americans.“As an Orthodox Jew, I grew up with the ideals of: You are an American and proudly so, and you're Jewish and proudly so. The two were never contradictory. They were quite complimentary. ... They very much influenced each other. As I said in my speech at the Republican Convention, Jewish values are American values. American values are Jewish values,” says Kestenbaum.Harvard University came under particular scrutiny for its failure to combat anti-Semitism on campus, ultimately leading to the forced resignation of its president, Claudine Gay. Today, Kestenbaum is suing his alma mater, alleging federal violations of the Civil Rights Act, under which, due to Trump's 2019 executive order concerning Title VI, Jewish students are now protected.“When we filed our lawsuit in mid-January, Harvard's response was not to apologize. It was not to acknowledge the reality of anti-Semitism. It was not to tell us what they were going to do. They filed a motion to dismiss with prejudice, meaning they were asking a judge not only to toss out our lawsuit but to make it so that no other Jewish student in the future would be able to hold them accountable for anti-Semitism,” says Kestenbaum. “To this day, they have not articulated a single policy that would prevent what happened to me from ever happening again to any student, Jew or not.”Views expressed in this video are opinions of the host and the guest, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

EELP senior staff attorney Hannah Perls speaks with speaks with Debbie Chizewer and Nick Leonard about environmental justice lawyering, including leveraging Title VI of the Civil Rights Act on behalf of frontline communities. Debbie Chizewer is a managing attorney with Earthjustice based in Chicago, where she leads the organization's Midwest litigation strategy. Nick Leonard is the executive director of the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center based in Detroit, which provides legal representation to communities across Michigan. This is the second episode in a 2-part series on Title VI. Transcript at https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/CleanLaw_EP99.pdf Links mentioned in episode: Episode I in this series https://soundcloud.com/user-995691545/ep-9860-years-of-title-vi-of-the-civil-rights-act-part-1-la-v-epa Great Lakes Environmental Law Center https://glelc.org/ Earthjustice Midwest Office https://earthjustice.org/office/midwest CARE v. EPA, No. 4:15-03292-SBA (N.D. Cal.) https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/114.20order20032030202018.pdf US Ecology Agreement between Michigan EGLE and Complainants https://www.sierraclub.org/sites/default/files/2024-08/title-vi-use-north-2024-08-29-title-vi-complaint-agreement-complaint-no-20-001-d-use-north-final_.pdf

Last year, the Supreme Court decided the cases of Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and Student for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina (SFFA). The Court held that the admissions programs of Harvard and UNC violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The decision has been interpreted broadly as outlawing race affirmative action in college and university admissions. However, in footnote 4 of the opinion, the Court indicated that its decision “does not address the issue” of race-based admissions programs at the military academies. Shortly after the release of SFFA, Students for Fair Admissions sued both West Point and the Naval Academy to directly challenge their admissions programs. This webinar will provide a litigation update in these cases and explore the ramifications of the exemption to the SFFA holding created by footnote 4 of the opinion.Featuring:John E. McGlothlin, Special Projects Officer, National Guard Bureau, Office of the Inspector General; Adjunct Professor, University of Maryland Global CampusJohn J. Park, Jr., General Counsel, Indigo Energy(Moderator) Devon Westhill, President and General Counsel, Center for Equal Opportunity

This Day in Legal History:  Articles of Confederation AdoptedOn November 15, 1777, the Continental Congress formally adopted the Articles of Confederation, establishing the first constitutional framework for the United States. Crafted during the Revolutionary War, the Articles aimed to unify the thirteen colonies under a single government while preserving their independence and sovereignty. This early governing document reflected deep fears of centralized authority, granting Congress limited powers such as conducting foreign diplomacy, declaring war, and managing relations with Native American tribes. However, it lacked crucial mechanisms for enforcement, taxation, and regulating interstate commerce. Under the Articles, each state retained significant autonomy, with Congress functioning as a weak central body unable to compel states to contribute financially or militarily. Unanimous consent from all states was required to amend the Articles, which proved a significant obstacle to addressing its shortcomings. These limitations became increasingly evident in the post-war period, as the fledgling nation struggled with economic disarray, unpaid war debts, and internal unrest such as Shays' Rebellion.The Articles served as a critical stepping stone in American constitutional development, highlighting the need for a more robust federal system. In 1787, the Constitutional Convention convened to replace the Articles, ultimately resulting in the U.S. Constitution, which created a stronger, more balanced federal government. Despite its shortcomings, the Articles of Confederation represented a bold experiment in democratic governance and the principle of federalism that continues to shape the nation's identity.Continuing the procession of unqualified and ill-equipped appointees, President-elect Donald Trump has nominated members of his criminal defense team for key positions in the Justice Department, including Todd Blanche as deputy attorney general. Blanche, a former Cadwalader attorney, is currently defending Trump in federal cases related to attempts to overturn the 2020 election and the mishandling of classified documents. Prior to representing Trump, Blanche was best known for defending Paul Manafort, Trump's former campaign chairman, who was convicted of tax and bank fraud in connection with consulting work for pro-Russian Ukrainian politicians. Blanche's nomination marks a significant appointment, as the deputy attorney general oversees the Justice Department's daily operations and investigative agencies like the FBI. Trump also nominated John Sauer, who argued successfully for broad presidential immunity in a 2020 election-related case, as solicitor general. Former Representative Matt Gaetz has been nominated for attorney general, signaling Trump's intent to place loyal defenders in top positions. Emil Bove, another member of Trump's legal team, has been tapped to serve as Blanche's acting deputy during the confirmation process. These appointments underscore Trump's aim to reshape the Justice Department amid ongoing scrutiny of investigations into him and his associates. All nominations require Senate confirmation but if you have retained faith in our institutions to keep bozos out of office, I have a bridge I'd love to sell you.Trump Picks Trio of His Lawyers for Top Justice Positions (3)Trump picks his defense lawyers for top Justice Department posts | ReutersThe Palm Springs city council has unanimously approved a $5.9 million reparations package for former residents of Section 14, a predominantly Black neighborhood demolished in the 1960s for commercial development. In addition to this settlement, the city plans to allocate $21 million toward housing and small business initiatives aimed at supporting the affected residents and their descendants. The Section 14 neighborhood also housed Latino families and other immigrants, many of whom have long sought recognition and compensation for their forced displacement. The settlement will provide payments to over 1,200 former residents and descendants, amounting to approximately $4,000 per person after legal fees. As part of the agreement, recipients must sign waivers releasing further claims against the city.Palm Springs Mayor Jeffrey Bernstein acknowledged the limits of financial restitution, describing the reparations as a symbolic step toward addressing past injustices. Advocacy groups like Section 14 Survivors and civil rights attorneys representing the displaced view the settlement as an important acknowledgment of the city's role in the destruction of the community. This initiative joins a small but growing number of reparations efforts in the U.S., such as Los Angeles County's 2022 return of prime beachfront property to the descendants of an African-American couple unjustly stripped of their land.California resort town of Palm Springs approves race reparations package | ReutersA federal appeals court has upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit brought by a Texas student, B.W., who alleged he was bullied for being white and a supporter of Donald Trump. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals split 9-9, which let a lower court's decision stand. B.W. argued that from grades 8 through 10, he faced harassment, including being called "Whitey" by a teacher, having a meme made of him as a Ku Klux Klansman, and being ostracized for his political and religious beliefs. He claimed the school district violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits racial discrimination in federally funded education programs.A prior panel had ruled that B.W.'s allegations were primarily tied to his ideological beliefs, which Title VI does not cover, and the evenly split rehearing reaffirmed this. Conservative judges, including Trump appointee James Ho, dissented, asserting that B.W. plausibly faced severe racial harassment because of his whiteness. However, the majority of judges noted that ideological bullying does not qualify as racial discrimination under Title VI. B.W.'s lawyer has indicated plans to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, citing the importance of protecting students from discrimination regardless of race, religion, or political beliefs. The case highlights ongoing debates over the scope of federal anti-discrimination laws.Bullied Trump-supporting white student can't sue for race discrimination | ReutersIn a piece I wrote for Forbes today, I make the argument that eliminating the electric vehicle (EV) tax credit would be a disaster for American manufacturers and, ultimately, consumers. President-elect Donald Trump's plan to eliminate the $7,500 EV tax credit threatens significant setbacks for the U.S. automotive industry, innovation, and environmental goals. The credit has played a vital role in making EVs affordable and driving their adoption, helping U.S. automakers remain competitive in a global market heavily supported by subsidies in countries like China and the EU. Without it, American automakers could struggle to compete against lower-cost foreign EVs while managing the high expenses of research and development.The policy could exacerbate issues already created by recent changes to R&D tax rules, which have limited immediate expensing for innovation costs. Combined, these moves could raise EV prices, reduce demand, and stifle the momentum of U.S. automakers like Ford and GM as they work to electrify their fleets. The decision may inadvertently benefit Tesla, whose cost advantages and market dominance could allow it to weather the loss, but other manufacturers, including smaller startups like Rivian and Lucid, may falter.Beyond economic consequences, removing the credit could slow the transition to clean transportation, impeding progress on reducing greenhouse gas emissions from one of the largest polluting sectors. The EV tax credit has been instrumental in fostering innovation, supporting high-quality jobs, and positioning the U.S. as a global leader in EV technology. Eliminating it risks conceding that leadership and undermining a vital segment of the future economy.Eliminating The Electric Vehicle Tax Credit Would Be A Huge MistakeThis week's closing theme is by Ludwig van BeethovenThis week's closing theme comes from one of the most towering figures in classical music. Renowned for his symphonies, sonatas, and concertos, Beethoven's influence extends beyond music into the cultural consciousness of resilience and innovation. Born in Bonn, Germany, in 1770, Beethoven overcame immense personal challenges, including progressive hearing loss, to create works of unparalleled emotional depth and complexity. His compositions bridged the Classical and Romantic eras, making him a symbol of human creativity and perseverance.One of Beethoven's lesser-known yet fascinating works is The Ruins of Athens, composed in 1811 as incidental music for a play by August von Kotzebue. Written to celebrate the opening of a new theater in Pest, Hungary (modern-day Budapest), the piece reflects Beethoven's enthusiasm for themes of cultural revival and enlightenment. The play itself portrays Athena, the goddess of wisdom, returning to find her city in ruins, only to witness its eventual rebirth—a story that resonated with Beethoven's own ideals of progress and renewal.The music is both dramatic and celebratory, featuring memorable melodies and rhythms that evoke the grandeur of ancient Greece. One of its most famous sections, the Turkish March, showcases Beethoven's playful side, incorporating exotic, percussion-driven elements inspired by Ottoman military music. The Ruins of Athens is an example of Beethoven's ability to compose across genres, crafting music that serves a narrative while remaining compelling as a standalone work.As we reflect on the themes of destruction and rebuilding in The Ruins of Athens, Beethoven reminds us of the enduring power of art to inspire hope and renewal, even in the face of adversity.Without further ado, Ludwig van Beethoven's The Ruins of Athens — enjoy. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

EELP Senior Staff Attorney Hannah Perls speaks with Olatunde Johnson, the Ruth Bader Ginsburg Professor of Law at Columbia Law School. Professor Johnson and Hannah discuss the history and evolution of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, a crucial legal tool for the environmental justice movement. Earlier this year, a federal judge blocked EPA and the Department of Justice from enforcing their Title VI rules prohibiting actions that disparately impact communities of color in the state of Louisiana, and now those rules are at risk of being struck down nationwide.   This is the first episode in a 2-part series on Title VI. Transcript at https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/CleanLaw_EP98.pdf Links mentioned in show: Louisiana v EPA - https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/2024.08.22-cain-judgement.pdf Our podcast on the "Quagmire Quartet" Suite of Supreme Court Decisions Undermine Administrative Law -https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/cleanlaw-suite-of-supreme-court-decisions-undermine-administrative-law/ Petition for Rulemaking on Title VI from Republican-led Attorneys General - https://www.myfloridalegal.com/sites/default/files/2024-04/epa-title-vi-comment-final.pdf Response to Petition for Rulemaking from Environmental Justice and Civil Rights Groups - https://www.nclc.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/2024.09.04_Letter_Title-VI-Response-cover-letter-executive-summary-response-letter.pdf Democratic AGs' Response to the Petition for Rulemaking - https://stateimpactcenter.org/files/AG_Actions_NY_Response_FL_Rulemaking_Petition_9.5.24.pdf Olatunde C. Johnson, Lawyering That Has No Name: Title VI and the Meaning of Private Enforcement, 66 Stan. L. Rev. 1293 (2014). - https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/1094/

Harvard legal scholar Cass Sunstein joins Mushtaq Gunja and Sarah Spreitzer to delve into the foundational role of the First Amendment in shaping responses to campus protests and free speech issues in higher education. Drawing from his latest book, Campus Free Speech: A Pocket Guide, written in the wake of the protests of spring 2024, Sunstein offers practical insights on the complexities surrounding the issue, including the distinctions between public and private institutions, the implications of Title VI, and more. The hosts also give a quick update on the short-term funding package approved by Congress just ahead of the Sept. 30 fiscal year deadline, and a new Government Accountability Office report on the troubled 2024 FAFSA rollout. Tweet suggestions, links, and questions to @ACEducation or podcast@acenet.edu.  Here are some of the links and references from this week's show: Campus Free Speech: A Pocket Guide Cass Sunstein Wants to Help Universities Navigate Free Speech Conflicts Inside Higher Ed | Sept. 3, 2024 House Set to Advance Bill Preventing Government Shutdown The Washington Post (sub. req.) | Sept. 25, 2024 Congressional Watchdog Digs Into FAFSA Fiasco, Revealing Oversights, Call-Center Failures, and Unresolved Glitches The Chronicle of Higher Education (sub. req.) | Sept. 24, 2024

Mexican-born of Syrian and Lebanese descent, Adela is an American activist and author known for her advocacy against antisemitism and her support for Zionist causes. As a student at NYU, she became prominent for filing a Title VI complaint against the university, alleging that it allowed antisemitic activities on campus. This led to a settlement where NYU revised its policies to include antisemitism as a form of discrimination. President Trump honored Adela and later signed the Executive Order Against Antisemitism, expanding the definition of Judaism thereby under Title VI protections. Cojab has also contributed to the World Jewish Congress's 80th anniversary book with a chapter titled "Confronting Terror: The Buenos Aires Bombings." Additionally, she co-hosted the podcast American-ish Show: Daughters of the Diaspora from 2022 to 2023. Her activism has extended to speaking engagements, including addressing antisemitism at various conferences and events. What allowed the Oct. 7 atrocities to unfold? Why are Jews best defined by their troubles? What could be the solution to antisemitism, anti-zionism, and anti-Jewish sentiment worldwide? what is actually within our control? Is there a science that can explain the laws that govern our development as a society, as a species? What can 2000 years of recorded Jewish history and big data tell us about ourselves? Why is it that despite our technological advancement we're still facing the same issues that have been plaguing our society for millennia? Is it possible that science, Jewish wisdom, and human history are not at odds with each other but are actually different points of view of the same thing? Different points of you? Thejewfunction is the only podcast brave enough to look for the root cause of antisemitism and a real solution to it according to the laws of nature. LISTEN TO THE MYSTERY BOOK PODCAST SERIES: https://anchor.fm/thejewfunctionpodcast SETH'S BOOK: https://www.antidotetoantisemitism.com/ FREE AUDIOBOOK (With Audible trial) OF THE JEWISH CHOICE - UNITY OR ANTISEMITISM: https://amzn.to/3u40evC LIKE/SHARE/SUBSCRIBE Follow us on Twitter/Facebook/Instagram @thejewfunction NEW: SUPPORT US ON PATREON patreon.com/thejewfunction

RANKIN COUNTY, Miss. (WLBT) - The Justice Department has opened a civil pattern or practice investigation into Rankin County, Mississippi, and the Rankin County Sheriff's Department. According to the Department of Justice, the investigation “will seek to determine whether RCSD engages in patterns or practices that violate the Constitution and federal law.” The DOJ's investigation came about after obtaining more details and information about the conduct at the department. The investigation will evaluate all types of force used by deputies in Rankin County, including deadly force. It will also assess whether the Rankin County Sheriff's Department engages in unlawful stops, searches, and arrests in violation of the Fourth Amendment and whether the department conducts discriminatory policing in violation of the 14th Amendment, Title VI, and the Safe Streets Act. While this is separate and independent from the prosecutions of the deputies convicted in the assault of Michael Jenkins and Eddie Parker, they want to determine if that type of behavior is instilled within the department. “Put simply, the concerns about the Rankin County Sheriff's Department did not end with the demise of the Goon Squad. There is no question that individual officers must be held accountable when they violate the law,” U.S. Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke said. Rankin County officials have pledged their cooperation in this investigation. US. Attorney Todd Gee hopes this will turn a page for Rankin County and the entire state. “We do not have to accept the old hatreds and abuse of the past, and we do not have to accept the false claim that safety comes at the price of a illegal force and abuse of power,” Attorney Gee said. Malik Shabazz, the attorney for Jenkins and Parker, released a statement on the investigation. It states, “This is a first, critical step in cleaning up the Sheriff's Department and holding Rankin County legally accountable for the years of constitutional violations against its citizenry. The torture and abuse of so many took place because, despite innumerable warnings, Rankin County and Sheriff Bailey belligerently refused to properly monitor and supervise this rogue and violent department. Rankin County's liability to its citizenry is much bigger than the ‘Goon Squad' as individuals. The next step for Rankin County is to make its victims whole, and to hopefully start a new chapter in justice.”

This Day in Legal History: Camp David AccordsOn September 11, 1978, Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian President Anwar Sadat reached a historic agreement at Camp David, laying the foundation for peace between Israel and Egypt. The Camp David Accords, brokered by U.S. President Jimmy Carter, marked the first time an Arab nation had agreed to recognize Israel, a significant diplomatic breakthrough in the Middle East. The accords outlined a framework for peace that included the eventual return of the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt, which had been occupied by Israel since the 1967 Six-Day War, and the establishment of normalized diplomatic and economic relations.The agreement was formalized in the Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty, signed in 1979. This peace treaty not only ended decades of conflict between the two nations but also set a precedent for future Arab-Israeli negotiations. The accords earned Sadat and Begin the Nobel Peace Prize in 1978, though Sadat's willingness to make peace with Israel led to his assassination in 1981 by Egyptian extremists. Despite challenges, the treaty has endured, making Egypt the first Arab country to formally make peace with Israel, reshaping geopolitics in the region and establishing the U.S. as a key mediator in Middle East peace efforts.A recent American Bar Association (ABA) survey reveals that financial stress and anxiety affect two-thirds of young lawyers, with student loan debt significantly shaping their career and life choices. The survey, conducted by the ABA's Young Lawyers Division and AccessLex Institute, found that 68% of respondents with student loans felt stressed or anxious due to their debt, while 67% of all young lawyers, regardless of loans, reported financial stress. Many respondents, particularly those owing $100,000 or more, said their debt led to feelings of depression or hopelessness. The survey also showed that student debt delays major life events like marriage and homeownership for 76% of participants. Most respondents borrowed for law school, with a median debt of $137,500. Additionally, 27% reported owing more now than at graduation due to income-based repayment plans. Despite financial challenges, 74% of young lawyers would still pursue a law degree, and 65% would attend the same law school. Public service loan forgiveness programs and Biden administration debt relief efforts have provided some support, though many obstacles remain.Financial stress and anxiety plagues two-thirds of young lawyers, ABA survey finds | ReutersThe U.S. House of Representatives is set to vote on a six-month stopgap funding bill proposed by Republican Speaker Mike Johnson, aimed at preventing a government shutdown before the fiscal year ends on September 30. The bill faces opposition from Democrats, primarily due to a provision that would require proof of citizenship to register to vote, a measure seen as politically charged ahead of the November elections. Former President Donald Trump has urged Republicans to pass this voting measure. However, some Republicans oppose the stopgap due to spending concerns, and two Republicans joined Democrats in blocking a procedural vote to advance the bill.If passed in the House, the bill faces an uphill battle in the Democrat-controlled Senate. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer criticized the proposal as overly partisan, while the White House has indicated President Biden would veto the bill. Biden's administration is pushing for a shorter funding extension and more disaster relief funding. Additionally, Congress faces a critical January 1 deadline to address the nation's debt ceiling, risking default if no action is taken.US House set to vote on Republican-backed stopgap funding measure | ReutersThree former Memphis police officers are standing trial in federal court for their involvement in the January 2023 death of Tyre Nichols, a Black motorist whose brutal beating by police officers led to widespread outrage and police reform. Video footage showed five officers kicking, punching, and using pepper spray and a baton on Nichols, who died three days later in a hospital. Two of the five officers have pleaded guilty to federal civil rights charges, leaving three facing trial, where they could face life in prison if convicted.The incident reignited concerns about racism and police brutality in the U.S., prompting reforms in Memphis, such as disbanding the specialized police unit involved in the incident and implementing stricter traffic stop protocols. The officers also face second-degree murder charges in a separate state case, which has been postponed until after the federal trial. Nichols' family has filed a $550 million lawsuit against the city, seeking damages to push for further changes in police practices nationwide.In response to the assault, additional officers were either fired or suspended, and several fire department employees involved in the incident were also dismissed.Three Memphis police officers go on trial in death of Tyre Nichols | ReutersThe Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has filed a civil rights complaint on behalf of University of Georgia students, alleging discrimination against individuals of Palestinian, Arab, and Muslim descent. The complaint, filed with the U.S. Department of Education, claims the university violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination by institutions receiving federal funding. According to CAIR, pro-Palestinian students faced harassment following the escalation of conflict in Gaza, and the university failed to adequately address or prevent this discrimination.The University of Georgia responded by emphasizing its support for free speech and non-discrimination policies, while also maintaining that it enforces rules against policy violations. The complaint comes amid widespread protests across U.S. campuses concerning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which have seen instances of both antisemitic and Islamophobic rhetoric. The conflict has led to heightened tensions and a broader discussion on human rights, discrimination, and free speech in academic settings.Muslim advocacy group files civil rights complaint against University of Georgia | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

As pro-Hamas protests continue around the country, we examine just why administrators are caving to student radicals; House Republicans seek to fill in the gaps in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act; and the Federal Reserve declines to lower interest rates. Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEj Ep.1956 - - -  DailyWire+: Upgrade to your BRAND NEW 2nd Generation Jeremy's Razor here: https://bit.ly/49uTQ1w Watch the brand new series, Judged by Matt Walsh only on DailyWire+: https://bit.ly/3TNB3sD Get 35% off your DailyWire+ Membership here: https://bit.ly/4akO7wC Get your Ben Shapiro merch: https://bit.ly/3TAu2cw  - - -  Today's Sponsors: PureTalk - Get 50% off your first month! http://www.PureTalk.com/Shapiro Helix Sleep - Get 30% off your order + 2 dream pillows. https://helixsleep.com/BEN Tax Network USA - Seize control of your financial future! Call 1-800-245-6000 or visit http://www.TNUSA.com/Shapiro Balance of Nature - Get 35% off Your Order of Fruits & Veggies + $10 Off Every Additional Set. Use promo code SHAPIRO at checkout: https://www.balanceofnature.com/ Blinds.com - Exclusive Discount for my Listeners! Tell them The Ben Shapiro Show sent you! https://www.blinds.com/ - - - Socials: Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3cXUn53  Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3QtuibJ  Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3TTirqd  Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3RPyBiB