Dept. of Education opens Title IX investigation into Western Carolina Univ.
The Department of Education announced the investigation Thursday, claiming that WCU has 'refused to comply with Title IX and to ensure sex-separated intimate spaces in federally funded institutions of higher education.'
The department said that it received credible reports that WCU 'allowed a male to room with a female in a girls' dormitory' and that WCU 'opened an investigation against a female student for asking a male student to leave a female locker room.'
The Department of Education cited a former student who said that the students involved in both incidents identified as transgender women.
'WCU's reported contempt for federal antidiscrimination laws and indifference to, and retaliation against, girls who have spoken up about males invading their intimate spaces is simply unacceptable,' said Craig Trainor, acting assistant secretary for civil rights.
When reached for comment, a Western Carolina University acknowledged receiving notice of the investigation from the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights.
'We believe that our campus policies and procedures are compliant with Title IX and all other federal and state laws,' the university said in a statement. 'We will work with OCR to fully resolve this complaint.'
Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits, with some exceptions, discrimination on the basis of sex involving any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
2 hours ago
- UPI
Trump targets Duke University amid DEI crackdown
The Department of Education under Secretary Linda McMahon on Monday launched a civil rights investigation into Duke University. File Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo July 29 (UPI) -- The Department of Education has launched a civil rights investigation into Duke University amid the Trump administration's crackdown on higher-learning institutions as it seeks to rid the private and public sector of diversity, equity and inclusion policies. The civil rights investigation was launched Monday into not only Duke but its law journal for violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by allegedly discriminating against students based on race. The investigation coincides with the departments of Education and Health and Human Services sending a joint letter to Duke University outlining their "shared concerns" about its use of race in its hiring, admissions and scholarship decisions. "If Duke illegally gives preferential treatment to law journal or medical school applicants based on those students' immutable characteristics, that is an affront not only to civil rights law, but to the meritocratic character of academic excellence," Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. "Blatantly discriminatory practices that are illegal under the Constitution, anti-discrimination law and Supreme Court precedent have become all too common in our education institutions. The Trump administration will not allow them to continue." Diversity, equity and inclusion, known as DEI, is a conceptual framework that promotes fair treatment and full participation of all people. It has been a target of conservatives who claim it focuses on race and gender at the expense of merit. Since returning to the White House in January, President Donald Trump has sought to remove DEI from the federal government and has threatened to revoke federal funding from several universities, including Harvard, over their alleged DEI programs. Dozens of schools have been the target of Trump administration civil rights investigations over DEI policies and practices. It has also launched investigations into schools over allowing transgender students to compete in women's sporting competitions, for not protecting Jewish students amid pro-Palestine protests and for providing migrants with scholarship opportunities denied to out-of-state Americans. Several of the schools have reached multimillion-dollar settlements with the Trump administration to resolve the civil rights investigations, including Columbia, which, earlier this month, agreed to pay $200 million to the federal government and end its DEI policies. The investigation launched Monday accuses Duke's law review of awarding extra points in its editor application process to personal statements that explain how the applicant's membership in an underrepresented group promotes diverse voices. In the joint letter from the Department of Education and HHS, they accuse Duke University School of Medicine of employing practices that "include illegal and wrongful racial preferences and discriminatory activity in recruitment, student admissions, scholarships and financial aid, mentoring and enrichment programs, hiring, promotion and more." No specifics were given. "The immediate request is simple: Review all policies and practices at Duke Health for the illegal use of race preferences, take immediate action to reform all of those that unlawfully take account of race or ethnicity to bestow benefits or advantages and provide clear and verifiable assurances to the government that Duke's new policies will be implemented faithfully going forward," the letter said. The departments called on the school to form a committee to carry out the Trump administration's request over a six-month period. Duke has 10 days to respond, it said. The departments said federal funding to the school was at risk.
Forbes
17 hours ago
- Forbes
The Domino Effect Of Gutting Education On Economic Mobility
Education is the cornerstone for better health outcomes and lifetime economic security. As AI advances, unequal access to quality education risks widening disparities further CLOSE-UP OF DOMINOES ARRANGED AGAINST BLUE BACKGROUND As another school year looms and millions of American children ready their backpacks for a new classroom, the department tasked with ensuring every child receives an equitable education faces an existential threat. The proposed dismantling of the U.S. Department of Education, made easier this month by a Supreme Court ruling in the Trump Administration's favor, is more than administrative tinkering — it is a seismic shift with profound consequences for society. The foundation of a healthy democracy and economy is built on accessible, high-quality public education, and destabilizing this core institution brings cascading impacts across all facets of American life. Without federal oversight from the Department of Education, essential programs would fragment or vanish altogether. Students in low-income communities who are disproportionately Black, Hispanic and Indigenous would be stripped of protections and funding that help close wide achievement gaps. These students already face persistent barriers of underfunded schools, less experienced teachers and reduced access to rigorous coursework compared to their white peers. Important federal statutes such as Title 1 (schools with a higher proportion of low-income students) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which currently ensure resources flow to schools serving students experiencing poverty and disabilities; could erode or disappear, jeopardizing the futures of millions. It's worth noting that 90% of U.S. students and 95% of students with disabilities access public schools — a system the Department of Education was designed to protect. The economic ramifications are stark. In the 2021–2022 fiscal year, government spending across all levels on K-12 education was around $880 billion, representing slightly more than 3.5% of GDP. The return on this investment is indisputable: research has shown that for every dollar spent on early childhood education, yields are upwards of 10x the return on investment when factoring in increased tax revenue and reduced welfare dependence. The poverty rate among individuals who did not graduate from high school in 2023 was more than 25%, more than five times the rate of those with a bachelor's degree or higher. High school graduates experience more stable employment, higher earnings, and dramatically lower rates of welfare usage. Spending cutbacks and the dissolution of federal oversight would slash these gains, increasing costs across public health, welfare and criminal justice systems. The dismantling of the Department of Education also compounds pre-existing inequities. Seventy years after Brown v. Board of Education, Black and Latinx students still attend schools with higher shares of students in poverty, fewer material resources and poorer graduation and college attainment rates. The odds are stacked against them — children from the lowest income families are far less likely to enroll in or graduate from four-year colleges and more likely to be incarcerated, keeping the ladder to middle-class stability out of reach. By gutting federal programs that relieve some of these burdens, the path to upward mobility becomes steeper and even more exclusive. We must also recognize that these threats to our existing education system come at a moment of rapid technological change. While artificial intelligence has the potential to personalize learning and streamline tasks for educators, it also risks amplifying existing inequities if students, particularly those from underfunded districts, are left behind due to lack of access to reliable technology — or worse yet, lose the foundational skills and critical thinking that effective educators foster. For those already facing obstacles, the absence of robust public education could transform AI's promise from uplifting to deepening disadvantage. The impacts of gutting education policy and funding do not stop at the classroom door. Education remains closely linked to health and lifetime earnings. Individuals with more education report better physical and mental health, lower rates of chronic conditions and longer life expectancies. Conversely, those with less education face not only diminished income, but also worsening health outcomes and heavier reliance on strained social safety nets. A collapse of federal support for education will echo through hospitals and social services, burdening society and creating financial fallout across generations. To witness the Department of Education facing an existential threat when children are sharpening pencils and teachers are redecorating classrooms is a bitter irony. Our present moment is not a single domino tumbling. It is a tableful toppling in sequence — education, the economy, racial justice, health and technological opportunity — falling faster, each impact making it harder for the next generation to rise. Dismantling our country's education agency is not the path to a better future. It is the deliberate unraveling of the social infrastructure that anchors American opportunity. When the last domino falls, rebuilding will be incalculably harder than protecting what we have now.
The Hill
20 hours ago
- The Hill
Watch out, Google: Trump should move online in his fight against left-wing bias
Opinions on President Trump's budget cuts to institutions like the Department of Education, NPR and PBS tend to differ along partisan lines. But the intent behind these actions is clear: to dismantle longstanding ideological bias within publicly funded educational and media institutions. However, if the administration's objective is genuinely to root out institutional bias, its scope must extend beyond traditional media. Trump must also confront the digital giants — most notably, Google, whose influence over public discourse dwarfs that of any single news outlet or federal program. Google receives substantial financial benefit from federal contracts and partnerships. It has also repeatedly faced scrutiny for partisan behavior and the suppression of conservative voices. While some argue that it is the only realistic option for search, there are alternatives that offer a more balanced experience and directly address concerns about partisan filtering. In 2019, former Google engineer Zach Vorhies leaked more than 950 internal documents exposing ideological manipulation within the company. These documents, shared with the U.S. Department of Justice, revealed a troubling ecosystem of 'blacklists,' manual overrides and algorithmic demotions specifically targeting such right-leaning news sources as Newsmax and The Western Journal. Public perception echoes these concerns. A Pew Research Center survey revealed that 73 percent of Americans believe social media platforms and browsers censor political views. Among Republicans, the figure rose to a staggering 90 percent. While partisan suspicion alone is insufficient to prove systemic bias, academic research adds weight to the claim. Robert Epstein, a behavioral psychologist with credentials from Harvard and former editor-in-chief of Psychology Today, provided peer-reviewed findings to the U.S. Senate indicating that Google's search manipulation may have influenced up to 2.6 million votes in favor of Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election. Epstein's research reveals how subtle algorithmic biases in search results can profoundly influence voter behavior. In certain demographic groups, that swing can climb to an astonishing 80 percent. This influence is particularly dangerous in close elections, where even a small nudge — between 4 percent and 8 percent — could determine the winner. He emphasized that such influence operates below the threshold of awareness, undetectable by users and immune to oversight, making it one of the most powerful and least accountable forms of political persuasion in the digital age. To be clear, Epstein had no political motive behind his findings. He was a supporter of the Clinton campaign in the 2016 election, said he has never supported a conservative candidate, and has remained center-left throughout his life. More recent audits show the trend continues. In 2024, AllSides conducted a systematic review of Google's election-related search results and found that 65 percent were geographically mismatched. AllSides concluded that this misdirection not only limited access to localized, relevant information, it also diminished the digital presence of conservative voices. Yet despite these troubling findings, Google's footprint within the federal government continues to grow. In July 2025, the tech giant's public-sector arm secured a Department of Defense contract worth up to $200 million for artificial intelligence services. Google also participates in the Joint Warfighter Cloud Capability initiative, a $9 billion cloud infrastructure project shared with Amazon and Microsoft. Through the General Services Administration, Google supplies Workspace tools to numerous federal agencies under a contract projected to save $2 billion over three years. Collaborations with DARPA, NASA, and the Department of Energy further entrench Google within critical government operations. Google isn't the only search engine available, but it still dominates the market, accounting for roughly 90 percent of global usage. That said, there are meaningful alternatives worth considering. Luxxle, for example, is a privacy-focused search engine that gives users greater control over their data and the ideological slant of the content they see. Unlike Google, it doesn't track searches, monitor user behavior, or build consumer profiles. If the Trump administration truly aims to uphold ideological neutrality and preserve intellectual freedom, cutting off funding to biased government institutions is just the first step. The greater challenge lies in confronting powerful private entities like Google, which function as modern-day gatekeepers of public discourse.
