Attorney General Pamela Bondi, Memorandum for All Federal Agencies: Guidance for Recipients of Federal Funding Regarding Unlawful Discrimination (press release):

One of our Nation’s bedrock principles is that all Americans must be treated equally. Not only is discrimination based on protected characteristics illegal under federal law, but it is also dangerous, demeaning, and immoral. Yet in recent years, the federal government has turned a blind eye toward, or even encouraged, various discriminatory practices, seemingly because of their purportedly benign labels, objectives, or intentions. No longer. Going forward, the federal government will not stand by while recipients of federal funds engage in discrimination.

This guidance clarifies the application of federal antidiscrimination laws to programs or initiatives that may involve discriminatory practices, including those labeled as Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (“DEI”) programs.

Entities receiving federal funds, like all other entities subject to federal antidiscrimination laws, must ensure that their programs and activities comply with federal law and do not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, or other protected characteristics-no matter the program’s labels, objectives, or intentions. In furtherance of that requirement, this guidance identifies “Best Practices” as non-binding suggestions to help entities comply with federal antidiscrimination laws and avoid legal pitfalls; these are not mandatory requirements but rather practical recommendations to minimize the risk of violations.

Entities that receive federal financial assistance or that are otherwise subject to federal antidiscrimination laws, including educational institutions, state and local governments, and public and private employers, should review this guidance carefully to ensure all programs comply with their legal obligations.

Chronicle of Higher Education, New Trump Administration Memo Tells Colleges Which DEI Efforts It Might Consider Illegal:

Here are some of the campus activities described in the DOJ’s letter as potentially discriminatory and illegal:

• “Facilities or resources” designated based on race or ethnicity. If a college has a “BIPOC-only study lounge,” the memo says, that could be “facially discouraging access” even if it’s open to all. “The identity-based focus creates a perception of segregation,” the memo states. This interpretation also applies to “event venues,” but not to single-sex restrooms or locker rooms.
• Hiring policies that explicitly or implicitly suggest identity preferences. An institution, the memo said, could not require that faculty-job finalist pools include “at least two ‘underrepresented minority’ candidates.” The memo also deemed problematic “diversity-focused evaluations” and “diversity decision-making panels.”
• Groups “that exclude participants based on protected traits.” The memo seemed to object to certain kinds of campus affinity groups, such as a “Black Faculty Caucus” or a “White Ally Group.” A “Faculty Academic Support Network” open to anyone interested in student success would be allowed, the document said.
• Training sessions that discuss “toxic masculinity.” Such programming would qualify as “stereotyping individuals based on protected characteristics,” the memo said. The document also warned colleges against imposing “penalties for dissent,” such as refusing to complete a training.
• Programs whose selection criteria aim to increase diversity. A university internship or fellowship could not mandate that 50 percent of students come from “underrepresented racial groups,” the memo says.
• Criteria like “cultural competence” or “first generation status,” depending on the context. The memo warns against using such characteristics as a proxy for race or identity in hiring, admissions, or any competitive selection process. Colleges also shouldn’t ask anyone to submit a diversity statement or to describe “obstacles they have overcome.”
• “Geographic or institutional targeting.” A scholarship program could not aim its recruitment efforts at “underserved geographic areas” if the goal is to increase participation by students from certain racial groups, the memo states. Recruiting based on “financial hardship” is acceptable, it says.

Editor’s Note:  If you would like to receive a daily email with links to legal education posts on TaxProf Blog, email me here.