The Department of Education directed educational institutions to dismantle race-based programming within two weeks or risk the withdrawal of federal funding in a Feb. 14 Dear Colleague Letter. The department’s deadline passed on Feb. 28, but College administrators declined to specify how the College might change campus programming in response.
Dear Colleague Letters are often used by government agencies to articulate the policy views and legal interpretations guiding their enforcement of the law. The Department of Education’s letter explains its interpretation of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. Harvard, a 2023 case in which the court held that race-based affirmative action in college admissions is unconstitutional.
“The College regularly reviews its programs to make sure they serve our students, faculty, and staff, and for compliance with applicable law,” Chief Communications Officer Meike Kaan wrote in an email to the Record on Tuesday. She declined to specify whether any College programming would change in response to the recent order.
“Data show that Americans care a lot about educational opportunity and fairness,” President Maud S. Mandel wrote in a Feb. 28 statement to the Record. “All of which is quite different from [the] preference-based or exclusionary approaches that the Dear Colleague Letter seems to be contemplating. Meanwhile, we’re taking steps … to make sure we’re on solid legal footing and doing everything we can to protect the College and our community.”
In a Feb. 18 email to the Record, several days after the release of the Dear Colleague Letter, Mandel wrote that the College was consulting educational and civil rights lawyers to understand the letter and its potential implications for the College.
According to legal experts, the letter could expand what constitutes discrimination under the SFFA decision to encompass any differing treatment on the basis of race. It will also extend the ruling’s reach beyond admissions to include hiring, financial aid, and other aspects of student life at educational institutions.
“Williams is focused on creating opportunity and eliminating unfair barriers to joining our community,” Mandel wrote in her most recent statement. “We also strive to ensure that students, once admitted, can fully participate in our educational offerings.”
While it is unclear what actions, if any, the College will take in response to the order, other institutions — such as the University of Pennsylvania and Northwestern University — have already removed content related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives from their websites.
An FAQ about the letter published by the Department of Education on March 1 clarified that it does not consider all programming labelled as DEI to be unlawful, but that the department will evaluate programs on a case-by-case basis. Some commentators have labeled this a “softening” of the initial letter.
“Schools must consider whether any school programming discourages members of all races from attending, either by excluding or discouraging students of a particular race or races, or by creating hostile environments based on race for students who do participate,” the FAQ states.
It names events for Black History Month and International Holocaust Remembrance Day as examples of programming that are legal according to these guidelines.
The mechanisms of the letter’s enforcement remain unclear. If courts affirm the department’s interpretation of the law, the process of investigating institutions’ programming and subsequently withdrawing funding is lengthy and complicated. According to Inside Higher Ed, the Department of Education has never revoked funding for any institution of higher education because of civil rights concerns.
