U.S. Agriculture Department suspends scholarships for students at historically Black colleges
Meanwhile, the American Bar Association has suspended its diversity, equity and inclusion accreditation requirement for law schools through Aug. 31.
The USDA web page for the program says, "The 1890 Scholars Program has been suspended pending further review."
No other information is provided and the USDA did not respond to a request for comment made Saturday.
The program "seeks to increase the number of minorities studying agriculture, food, natural resource sciences and related disciplines and provides recipients with full tuition, employment, employee benefits, fees, books, and room and board every year for up to four years," according to the USDA.
The scholarship program is intended for 19 of the nation's designated 1890s land-grant universities and Tuskegee University, and in 2024 supported 94 students at a cost of $19 million, WTVF in Nashville, Tenn., reported.
No information is available regarding the exact date that the USDA suspended the scholarship program or when the review period might end.
One member of Congress denounced the suspension as denying opportunities for marginalized students.
"This is a clear attack on an invaluable program that makes higher education accessible for everybody and provides opportunities for students to work at USDA, especially in the critical fields of food safety, agriculture and natural resources that Americans rely on every single day," Rep. Alma Adams, D-N.C., told WTVF.
"This program is a correction to a long history of racial discrimination within the land-grant system [and] not an example of it."
USDA officials said all current students and others approved for the program are still being supported while it is under review.
"USDA is optimizing operations and strengthening its ability to serve farmers, ranchers, and the agriculture community," a spokesperson told WTVF.
"Like other programs within the Department, Secretary [Brooke] Rollins will continue to review the 1890 National Scholars Program, its mission, and its metrics to ensure the most efficient use of taxpayer resources."
American Bar Association
The ABA is the only organization that the Education Department recognizes for law school accreditation in the United States and has suspended its DEI requirement to rewrite its Standard 206, which was titled "Diversity and Inclusion."
The council of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar on Friday voted to suspend its law school accreditation standard due to the Trump administration's executive order mandating the end of DEI efforts and potential loss of funding from the U.S. Department of Education.
"The committee's view is that with the executive orders and the law being in flux, it would be an extreme hardship for law schools if our standards were to require them to do certain things that may cause them to take more litigation risks and potentially violate the law," said Daniel Thies, chair-elect of the council and co-chair of its Strategic Review Committee.
The council is developing a new draft of its standard, which could be presented to the ABA House of Delegates for consideration during the association's annual meeting in August.
The ABA also will review the council's Standard 205, which is titled, "Non-Discrimination and Equality of Opportunity," and requires law schools to provide students with education related to cultural competence, racism and bias.
The ABA did not suspend its Standard 205 accreditation requirement.
The DEI-related changes are in response to the Trump administration banning DEI initiatives and all federal support for them.
The Department of Education might end federal funding for colleges and universities that have DEI requirements or initiatives in place despite the federal ban.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a minute ago
- Yahoo
US farm agency plan to close flagship research site threatens critical research, critics warn
By Leah Douglas WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Department of Agriculture's plan to close its flagship laboratory near Washington, D.C., could undermine research on pests, blight and crop genetics crucial to American farms, according to lawmakers, a farm group, and staff of the facility. The USDA has already lost thousands of research staff to President Donald Trump's effort to shrink the federal government, even as Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins has said farm research is a pillar of national security. Rollins said in July that the USDA will close the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center, which occupies nearly 7,000 acres in the Maryland suburbs outside Washington, as part of an agency reorganization effort that will also move roughly half of its Washington-area staff to hubs in North Carolina, Utah and elsewhere. The agency has said it is closing BARC and several other USDA buildings because of costly necessary renovations and underutilized space. Workers at BARC in 2023 filed whistleblower complaints about unsafe working conditions there. But critics of the plan to close BARC say it could backfire by interrupting the facility's ongoing research, and by pushing the scientists conducting it to resign. "It is unlikely that senior scientists of this caliber with mature research partnerships and rich professional lives will simply move somewhere else," said Donnell Brown, president of the National Grape Research Alliance, which depends on BARC research into vine stress and water usage. U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat, also slammed the plan. "You have a lot of people who have invested their time and effort in research for farmers across the country, and this plan would destroy that ongoing research," he said. Three staff at the facility, who requested anonymity out of fear of retribution, said the co-location of many labs at BARC allows for economies of scale and cost savings, and that the proximity to Washington enables researchers to easily brief lawmakers or other parts of the USDA. The USDA did not immediately respond to questions about the criticisms. Rollins said in a July memo outlining the relocation effort that the BARC facility would be closed over several years to avoid disruptions to critical research. The USDA on July 25 told the House and Senate agriculture and appropriations committees that it did not have data or analysis underpinning its reorganization plan to share with members of Congress or their staff, according to a letter sent from Democrats on the House Agriculture Committee to Rollins on August 14. "Ostensibly they're saying it would save money, but I haven't seen any study that suggests that's the case," said U.S. Representative Glenn Ivey, whose Maryland district contains the BARC site.
Axios
17 minutes ago
- Axios
Transgender District launches emergency fund amid cuts
San Francisco's historic Transgender District is fighting for its place in the city with a new fund aimed at countering cuts that have forced it to scale back services. Why it matters: The district was founded in 2017 — the first of its kind in the world — and works to support trans and nonbinary people, a mission its leaders say has gained renewed urgency amid an influx of LGBTQ+ people from red states. State of play: The district had some grants rescinded earlier this year while philanthropic support dropped locally and nationwide, according to co-executive director Breonna McCree. "We need support in real time to continue the vital work that we were doing," McCree told Axios. The latest: The Transgender District is launching a multi-year emergency fund in a bid to secure long-term survival. The Riot Fund, unveiled ahead of the district's annual Riot Party, aims to raise $100,000 over the next three years to help buffer budget shortfalls. At the Riot Party, which honors the legacy of one of the first documented LGBTQ+ uprisings in U.S. history, attendees will be asked to contribute what they can. It's part of a broader effort to diversify the district's funding sources, co-executive director Carlo Gómez Arteaga told Axios. Friction point: Most of the district's funding thus far has relied on government sources — primarily at the local level. Mayor Daniel Lurie's budget restructuring, however, led to cuts that forced the district to scale back services. Zoom in: The district has had to pause its flagship entrepreneurship accelerator and was unable to renew its rent stabilization program, which aims to address the economic disparities that contribute to higher risks of housing insecurity for trans and nonbinary people. Other impacted programs include its social justice fellowship and wellness and safety initiatives like Name & Gender Marker Change Clinics, which help people update legal documents to reflect the name and gender aligned with their identity. What they're saying:"Our community is very nuanced, and we need different pathways for entry to support," Gómez Arteaga said. "The more pathways to entry to support, the greater likelihood that person will get the support systems that they need." Young trans children should grow up knowing "they can be more than just activists, that they can follow their dreams and not have to fight for their lives all the time," he added. Between the lines: With escalating anti-trans legislation across the U.S., San Francisco has seen a "great migration" of trans and nonbinary people fleeing red states, McCree noted. Many are often unable to contend with the Bay Area's high costs of living right off the bat. That's increased the urgency of bolstering the social services infrastructure, local LGBTQ+ advocates have told Axios. What's next: The Riot Party takes place 4–9pm Saturday at 981 Mission St. It's co-produced with the all-Black drag show Reparations and will feature a lineup of performers that includes Nicki Jizz, Naomi Smalls, Redbone and more.
Axios
32 minutes ago
- Axios
What historians say is at risk if Trump expands his culture war beyond Smithsonian
Politics & Policy A White House official told Axios that President Trump intends to expand his review of American museums for "woke" ideology beyond the Smithsonian Institution. Why it matters: The size and scope of Trump's inquiries represents an unprecedented level of museum oversight in the nearly 250 years of American democracy, historians say. It also represents an escalation of the president's attack on cultural institutions. Here's what historians and curators fear could happen if Trump reframes museums through his perspective. What exactly does the president have in mind? Trump said that the "Smithsonian is OUT OF CONTROL" on Truth Social earlier this week. He then directed his attorneys to conduct a comprehensive review of the museum system, similar to the process officials have conducted at colleges and universities. What they're saying:"President Trump will explore all options and avenues to get the Woke out of the Smithsonian and hold them accountable," a White House official told Axios. "He will start with the Smithsonian and then go from there," they continued. Reality check: The Smithsonian is not a federal agency under control of the president, according to the institution. It's an independent institution, governed by a Board of Regents, which is composed of seventeen members, including the Vice President. Trump has no authority over private museums. Yes, but: The president could freeze the federal funding that some private museums receive, the way he has for schools that don't align with his anti-diversity views on education. What does Trump's perception of American history look like? Trump claims that there has been a "widespread effort to rewrite our Nation's history" over the past decade. He insists that these efforts "undermine" America's achievements by casting its founding principles as "inherently racist, sexist, oppressive, or otherwise irredeemably flawed." Historians say the administration's singular, sanitized approach to the past, focusing solely on America's positive moments misses out on the nuance of American history and excludes the lived experiences of Black, Indigenous, Latino, and LGBTQ+ people. Friction point:"That is anti-democratic," Beth English, executive director of the Organization of American Historians told Axios, referring to the administration's push to stifle and sanitize information, debate and historical facts. "It's not education, right?" English questioned. "It begins to kind of veer into the space of indoctrination, selecting, sort of a selective memory of what is and isn't going to be part of our national story." Why is Trump's push to install political appointees to review museums problematic? Curators said distilling history into accurate, engaging examples that the public can understand requires a level of expertise that an untrained political appointee likely lacks. The majority of curators at national museums have PhDs, or have been trained in museum studies through rigorous degree programs and research. "It's not like people are creating exhibitions to tell a story, to win a political agenda," Omar Eaton-Martinez, former board president of the Association of African American Museums said. "People are actually curating exhibitions based on scholarship that is supported by evidence," he continued. Don't museums reframe and reevaluate history all the time? Historians say museums expanding their collections isn't evidence of nefarious behavior, but rather, it's simply how the static nature of history grows. Zoom out: Collections have increasingly included the perspectives of sociologists, psychologists and other social scientists over the past few decades, in addition to more thorough reviews of census records, genealogy, oral histories, archeology, objects, and images. "We're constantly building on prior scholarship to help ask more nuanced questions about a topic," Sarah Weicksel, executive director of the American Historical Association said. "We're always peeling back the layers of the onion, so to speak." Black, Indigenous and Latin scholars have been digging into their respective histories for centuries, and those experiences have been recognized and incorporated into museums in recent decades. That includes history that was once ignored, such as the burning of records in thriving Black neighborhoods such as the massacres in Tulsa, Oklahoma or Rosewood, Florida; the forced removal of Indigenous nations from one part of America to another during the " trail of tears"; and urban renewal projects to upgrade cities that ultimately gentrify communities of color. What funding and programs has Trump already taken aim at? The Trump administration has taken aggressive action to reduce the staffing and funding available for the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS,) the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the National Endowment for the Arts. Stunning stat: IMLS's acting director testified in court that the administration cancelled roughly 92% of the agency's Grants to States. Only 100 grants remain out of the original 1,200 managed by the institute prior to Trump's executive order. The president also attempted to fire Kim Sajet, the director of the Smithsonian's National Portrait Gallery, earlier this year due to her support of diversity initiatives, despite not having the authority to do so. The Smithsonian has legal authority over personnel decisions, but Sajet eventually decided to step down in the weeks following Trump's announcement. What other times has an American museum pivoted after political influence? An exorbitant amount of debate goes into exhibit decision-making, so museums have already determined the best way to display potential controversies. When museums modify exhibits, it's typically due to public pressure, and has never been under significant force from the president. Case in point: The Smithsonian's 90s exhibit on Enola Gay, the B-29 bomber that dropped the atomic bomb, sparked opposition from veterans and members of Congress on how to interpret the bomb's dropping and America's role in World War II. The bottom line:"These kinds of controversies exist frequently, and that's a good thing, because public debate about the nation's past is healthy," James Grossman, former executive director of the American Historical Association told Axios. "But the President of the United States has no business telling museums what to exhibit, telling teachers what to teach, and has no business telling Americans what to think," Grossman continued.
