Proposed bill by Clarksville Rep. Maberry would nix DEI in local government, colleges
A bill to prohibit Diversity, Equity and Inclusion has been introduced to the Tennessee General Assembly by Rep. Aron Maberry, R-Clarksville.
On Feb. 2, freshman legislator Maberry, District 68, introduced the "Dismantle DEI Act," or House Bill 0622, into the state legislature that would prohibit Tennessee's local governments and higher education public institutions from using DEI-influenced hiring metrics.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Naval Academy Reinstates Hundreds of ‘DEI' Books
This article was originally published in The 19th. This story was originally reported by Nadra Nittle and Mariel Padilla of The 19th. When the U.S. Naval Academy stripped 381 books tied to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) from its library, retired Commander William Marks saw more than censorship — he saw a threat to the Navy's future. But last week, after immense public outcry, most of those books returned to Nimitz Library shelves. 'Do you believe it?' asked Marks, a 1996 alum who spearheaded a campaign to maintain student access to the books. 'What great news. We're thrilled.' Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter All the books the academy removed in early April had one thing in common: Officials flagged them for DEI themes. They include Maya Angelou's 'I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings,' Harper Lee's 'To Kill a Mockingbird' and Elizabeth Reis' 'Bodies in Doubt: An American History of Intersex.' The purge followed directives from Trump-appointed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who has called DEI initiatives 'divisive.' Determined to ensure that students could still read the works, Marks began crowdfunding to replace them on April 5. 'The motto of the Naval Academy is 'from knowledge, seapower,'' said Marks, who served as a Navy commander for 22 years. 'What we mean is without knowledge, education and intellectual growth, we will never become a strong Navy. So this contradiction really struck me, that instead of encouraging knowledge and encouraging discussion, the Pentagon was actually suppressing knowledge and limiting discussion.' About 4,400 students, members of the Brigade of Midshipmen, attend the Naval Academy while on active duty in the U.S. Navy. After graduation, they are required to serve in the Navy or Marine Corps for at least five years. Women represent more than a quarter of the student body, while men make up over 70 percent of midshipmen. Initially, Marks hoped to fundraise $3,810, which he figured would be enough to cover the cost of the books pulled from Nimitz Library. Since Marks lives in Arlington, Texas, he tapped Old Fox Books & Coffeehouse in Annapolis, Maryland, home to the academy, to be his local partner. Donations have far exceeded his goal, topping $70,000. Jinny Amundson, an owner of Old Fox Books, said by the time she got the call from Marks, she had already heard about the books removed and had started compiling a list of them to purchase for the store's inventory. 'For a bookseller, the idea of censoring any kind of books just gives us heart palpitations,' Amundson said. 'And it's our community. The [midshipmen] think of our shop as a place that they love and one of their sort of unofficial bookstores. We have the mids, the faculty, the administration that come in and think of our space as their own.' Amundson said she understood that the removal of books was an order, which has to be followed within the military. But she found the loophole: Her bookshop could store the titles targeted. It is conveniently located about a block away from the Naval Academy gates. The day before the institution's May 23 graduation, Amundson learned that most of the pulled books were back on the library's shelves. She went to see for herself, took pictures of the books and sent them to many of the authors, who had personally contacted her when the restrictions on the works took effect. Now, just 20 books are being sequestered pending a formal compliance review, according to the Department of Defense. A Navy spokesperson did not provide details to The 19th about those titles. Ultimately, a narrowing of the search terms used to flag books for review resulted in the return of hundreds of books to the Nimitz Library, as the Department of Defense first issued broad guidance about book removals to the military services. 'What struck me was the very arbitrary and even cruel nature of the books that got removed,' Marks said. 'These books were a cross-section of American culture. They were important to the discussion of American history.' In an updated May 9 memo, the Pentagon instructed the military services to use 20 search terms to pinpoint books in their academic libraries that might need to be set aside because of how they engage race or gender. Among those terms were affirmative action; critical race theory; gender-affirming care; transgender people; and diversity, equity and inclusion. People across the political spectrum expressed alarm about the book restrictions, which have been widely opposed, according to Marks. 'We really shouldn't be banning any books,' he said. That includes those with unpopular, or even offensive, ideas like Adolf Hitler's 'Mein Kampf,' which managed to evade the Naval Academy's book purge, he noted. He calls his effort to maintain the midshipmen's access to all books in the Nimitz Library Operation Caged Bird, after the 1969 Angelou memoir that was likely targeted because it describes racial segregation and child abuse. The name Operation Caged Bird also alludes to the feeling of being restrained by censorship. 'I almost felt like I could feel the bars closing in on me in terms of what I can read and can't read,' Marks said. 'That didn't sit right.' Marks' GoFundMe campaign has raised enough money to supply 1,000 books in 2025 and fund a three-year initiative at Old Fox, ensuring midshipmen can access any contested title for free. 'If you're a midshipman and you're writing an essay paper and there's a book you can't find, maybe it's been removed or banned, you can call them, and they'll order it for you, and then you just pick it up free of charge,' Marks said. He's also coordinating with other service academies, anticipating similar battles. At the Navy's three other educational institutions, fewer than 20 books have been flagged as potentially incompatible with the military's mission, as have a few dozen at the Air Force Academy and other Air Force academic institutions. The Army has also been ordered to assess library books at its educational institutions, but a spokesperson from West Point told The 19th that no books have been pulled at this time, as its compliance review is still underway. The return of nearly 400 books to the Naval Academy library coincides with a pending lawsuit accusing Department of Defense-run schools of violating K-12 students' constitutional rights for limiting books and subject matter related to gender, race and sexuality. The American Civil Liberties Union filed E.K. v. Department of Defense Education Activity in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on behalf of 12 students. A hearing will take place June 3. The ACLU seeks a preliminary injunction to give the youth access to materials it argues have been restricted to align with President Donald Trump's executive orders and political agenda. Amundson said she was pleasantly surprised that it took just weeks for the books to be returned to the Naval Academy. 'I believe that what happened and the response that was given in Annapolis — I think that made the administration be much more careful this time around as they're going for these other libraries, the other Department of Defense libraries around the world,' she said. Amundson said using the funds raised from the GoFundMe campaign, the bookstore was able to give away nearly 500 books in the days leading up to the Naval Academy graduation. For weeks, letters of support piled up and people stopped by the bookstore with gratitude, some even driving from hours away to show their support in person. In addition to Operation Caged Bird, Amundson said there were 'powerful arms at work.' There was pushback on the book removals from members of Congress, the Naval Academy's Board of Visitors and the superintendent — who wrote an open letter signed by hundreds of alumni. 'For right now, this was a huge win for us,' Amundson said.
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
How civil rights investigations against schools have changed under Trump admin
Amid a flurry of civil rights and Title IX investigations, the Trump administration has reopened K-12 schools and universities, signaling a complete 180-degree shift in the interpretation of the mandates. The Trump administration is fighting schools over transgender athletes, bans on Native American mascots and Chicago's 'Black Students Success Plans.' The switch from the previous administration has caused whiplash for schools, with advocates warning students some complaints may not be worth pursuing. 'The Trump Administration has created dumpsters for so-called civil rights violations that are distractingly unresponsive to actual acts of violence, harassment, discrimination and abuse in our nation's educational institutions,' says Shaun Harper, a professor of education, public policy and business at the University of Southern California. 'It is painfully apparent that destructive politicized attacks on DEI are far more important to them than are efforts to ensure the actual civil rights of American students, families and educators,' he added, referring to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. The most drastic change has been in the handling of cases involving transgender athletes. The Biden administration notably moved to add protections for LGBTQ individuals to Title IX, a civil rights law that protects students against sex-based discrimination. Former President Biden also proposed protections for transgender students, such as forbidding overarching bans on transgender women in girls' sports, but withdrew the proposal before President Trump took office, so the new president could not take the provision and alter it. Under the Trump administration, dozens of schools have come under fire with alleged Title IX violations over transgender athletes. The biggest threat occurred against California after the Trump administration said it would pull federal funding from the state following a transgender high school track and field athlete qualifying to compete in the state championship. 'It's definitely been tough to have students come to us who are considering filing an Office of Civil Rights [OCR] complaint because they've experienced discrimination at their school, and have to sort of say, 'I'm not even sure if it's a good idea at this moment,' given the way that the Trump administration is enforcing Title IX,' said Emma Grasso Levine, senior manager of Title IX policy and programs at the Title IX advocacy project Know Your IX. 'Having OCR suddenly stop being an option for many students because of the discriminatory way that the Trump administration is operating … really does limit mechanisms for accountability to ensure that schools are handling Title IX cases and preventing sex-based harassment,' she added. In a statement to The Hill, Department of Education spokesperson Julie Hartman said the Trump administration is 'restoring civil rights law and reversing the damage inflicted by the Biden Administration, which stretched the scope of federal anti-discrimination law beyond its statutory purview.' Hartman added, 'By enforcing the law as it is written, the Trump Administration's OCR is using its personnel and resources responsibly to protect all Americans and eliminating wasteful and unfounded investigations.' While the Trump administration has been vague in its definition of what DEI initiatives are at schools, the civil rights investigations the Education Department is opening give a glimpse at its meaning. Chicago Public Schools is currently under investigation over 'Black Students Success Plans' the district made, without making similar plans for students of other ethnicities. The Education Department launched a probe against New York's Education Department after it threatened to strip funding from a school for having a Native American mascot. 'Forcing them to change the name, after all of these years, is ridiculous and, in actuality, an affront to our great Indian population. The School Board, and virtually everyone in the area, are demanding the name be kept,' Trump said about the incident. Supporters of the president are encouraged by the rapid switch in gears in what investigations are brought to schools, pointing out some families have been waiting four years for this. 'The [Biden] administration had a pretty clear stance in favor of what they called equity, but I argue was really racial favoritism and an ideology in favor of identity politics,' said Jonathan Butcher, a senior research fellow in education policy at the Heritage Foundation. 'The Trump administration is, I believe, appropriately viewing the Civil Rights Act in terms of colorblindness and meritocracy and trying to preserve, or at least restore those things to American public life and in public law,' he added. 'It should be a relief to local educators and families who are concerned that the transgender movement has taken over our view of what it means to be male and female.' The relief by some parents — and fear by others — of what cases will be prioritized highlights the struggle with the political whiplash that can occur when the Education Department switches hands. 'Even with the pingponging, it doesn't mean that the Trump administration is accurate, and they're putting forward an unlawful and wrong interpretation of the law by distorting the law and using it as a way to require discrimination against students, and especially students from vulnerable communities,' said Shiwali Patel, senior director of Safe and Inclusive Schools. There are concerns about how the Trump administration is using the Office of Civil Rights, but also if it will even exist by the end of his presidency. Many employees in the office were fired during the Education Department's reduction in force, and Trump has floated moving OCR to the Department of Justice. Some advocates have said the Department of Education will be unable to uphold its legal obligations, especially as OCR cases were already backlogged before the layoffs. 'They're prioritizing weaponizing these laws to require harm against students, against vulnerable groups of students, with the few resources that they have, because now we're now dealing with an OCR that is at almost half of what it used to be because of all the cuts and the layoffs that the Trump administration has engaged in,' Patel said. The North Star for both sides is passing laws either in Congress or on the state level to fight against the executive changes that happen to these investigations every four years. 'I think the states have adopted laws that have prohibited boys in girls' sports,' Butcher said. 'All of these things that states are doing are codifying what the Trump administration is now supporting.' 'At the federal level, it'll definitely be up to Congress, of course, when it comes to putting something into law. And I think that federal lawmakers would do well to be mindful not only of what the Civil Rights statutes say on this issue, but also what voters are feeling like,' he added. 'Voters, I think, have made it clear through surveys that these positions on, again, boys getting access to girls' private spaces and sports, are unpopular.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Trump's war against DEI isn't going so well in Virginia
Apparently when President Trump says 'illegal DEI,' he means lawful and common-sense efforts to integrate public schools. At least, that's the takeaway from the Department of Education's new investigation against Fairfax County Public Schools. Trump officials claim Fairfax County violated federal law when it adopted an admissions policy designed to 'change the demographic make up' of its most competitive high school. This theory, which equates integration with segregation, dates back to Barry Goldwater, who remarked in 1964 that 'the Constitution is color-blind … and so it is just as wrong to compel children to attend certain schools for the sake of so-called integration as for the sake of segregation.' It seems Trump agrees. Unfortunately for him, the Supreme Court does not. Just last year, the court declined to overturn a ruling for Fairfax County. As I explained at the time, that decision made sense. Even as the Supreme Court has shifted hard right, decades of conservative case law — including from Chief Justice John Roberts — condone racial goals such as diversity, equality and inclusion. The new investigation tracks Trump's disregard for courts and his tendency toward bluster over substance. But in important respects, it also exposes that Trump's war on DEI lacks any moral and legal basis. Some context is helpful. For decades, Black advocates sought to desegregate Thomas Jefferson High School, one of the nation's top-ranked public schools. As recently as 2012, the NAACP filed a civil rights complaint alleging that the school's admissions policies discriminated against African American and Hispanic students and students with disabilities. Things shifted in 2020. As racial justice protests erupted across the globe, local leaders grappled with the fact that in a county with roughly 100,000 Black residents, Thomas Jefferson High School admitted so few Black students that the number was too small to report. The state convened a task force to examine the causes of this ongoing exclusion at Thomas Jefferson and other Virginia schools. Following a series of hearings, the board revised the school's admissions process, eliminating a $100 application fee and a standardized testing requirement. Contrary to ongoing claims that the new policy compromised 'merit,' the board raised the minimum GPA for admission from 3.0 to 3.5 and added an honors course requirement. The new policy also implemented a holistic evaluation that included new 'experience factors,' such as whether the applicant qualified for reduced meals or is an English language learner. The updated process also ensured that each middle school receive a number of seats equal to 1.5 percent of its eighth-grade class. The school board resolved that '[t]he admission process must use only race-neutral methods that do not seek to achieve any specific racial or ethnic mix, balance or targets.' This means that admissions officials are not told the race, ethnicity, sex or name of any applicant. In Supreme Court parlance, the entire admissions process was 'colorblind.' The new process produced promising results. In its inaugural year, Thomas Jefferson High School received 1,000 more applicants than the prior cycle. This larger applicant pool also 'included markedly more low-income students, English-language learners, and girls than had prior classes at TJ.' Consistent with the heightened GPA requirement, the admitted class's mean GPA was higher than in the five preceding years. The new process also yielded greater racial diversity. Black students comprised 10 percent of the applicant pool and received nearly 8 percent of offers and Hispanic students comprised 11 percent of the applicant pool and received over 11 percent of offers. The overall percentage of Asian American students decreased from the preceding year, but Asian Americans continued to enjoy the highest percentage yield of all racial groups. And as the Fourth Circuit detailed, Asian American students from historically underrepresented middle schools 'saw a sixfold increase in offers, and the number of low-income Asian American admittees to TJ increased to 51 — from a mere one in 2020.' In short, Thomas Jefferson High School adopted a 'race-neutral' process to pursue a set of goals that included increasing Black and Hispanic representation. This is the precise type of practice the Trump administration denigrates as 'illegal DEI.' Efforts to promote racial diversity do constitute DEI. But they are far from illegal. In fact, Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard — the 2023 decision striking down Harvard University's formal consideration of applicant race — supports most of the DEI policies Trump now targets. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Roberts deemed Harvard's underlying goals as 'worthy' and 'commendable.' Justice Brett Kavanaugh made the point more directly; writing for himself, Kavanaugh noted that 'racial discrimination still occurs and the effects of past racial discrimination still persist' and that 'universities still can, of course, act to undo the effects of past discrimination in many permissible ways that do not involve classification by race.' The actions of the high school square with Kavanaugh's call for policies that attend to race but do not differentiate between individual students on this basis. This should short-circuit the Department of Education's investigation against Fairfax County. But it is unlikely to stall Trump's desire to outlaw integration. The Pacific Legal Foundation, which initiated the lawsuit against Fairfax County and remains a force on the right, wants to revive Goldwater's hostile approach to integration. Consider the following FAQ on Pacific Legal's website: 'schools may use or not use standardized tests, essays, interviews, or auditions, as long as their reasons for using or not using them are not racial.' By this logic, a high school could lawfully eliminate an admissions fee if motivated by public relations concerns, but it would be unlawful to take that same action if done to decrease racial barriers that exclude low-income Black and Hispanic students. Now consider higher education. Per Pacific Legal, Harvard University could eliminate admissions preferences for the children of alumni and wealthy donors if done to appease alumni pressure. But it would be unlawful for Harvard to take the same action if the goal is increasing the number of Asian American students or mitigate unearned racial preferences that flow to wealthy white applicants. The upshot is that affirmative efforts to reduce racial inequality — everything Trump dubs 'illegal DEI' — remain legal and morally just. So, at least for now, integration does not equate to segregation. Jonathan Feingold is an associate professor at Boston University School of Law. He is an expert in affirmative action, antidiscrimination law, education law, and critical race theory. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
