Dept. of Education launches investigation into Duke University over alleged racial preferences
The Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) cited reports that the Law Journal circulated a packet to school "affinity groups" in 2024 regarding the application process to join the Journal in the new year. Each applicant was asked to write a 12-page memo analyzing an appellate court decision and a 500-word personal statement which would be judged on a points-based grading system along with their first-year GPA.
However, applicants from these "affinity groups" were reportedly given the opportunity to receive extra points if their statements referenced their "race or ethnicity" and up to 10 points for describing how their "membership in an underrepresented group" promoted "diverse voices."
The OCR believes that this action could be a potential violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
"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," Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said in a statement. "Blatantly discriminatory practices that are illegal under the Constitution, antidiscrimination law, and Supreme Court precedent have become all too common in our educational institutions. The Trump Administration will not allow them to continue."
McMahon, along with Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr., sent a joint letter to Duke University requesting the school "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—including by making all necessary organizational, leadership, and personnel changes to ensure the necessary reforms will be durable."
The department is also requesting Duke University set up a "Merit and Civil Rights Committee" to help resolve further civil rights violations.
Fox News Digital reached out to Duke University and Duke Law Journal for comment but did not immediately receive a response.
Duke University has come under fire multiple times for racial preferences and pushes for diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) in the past year.
Last year, Fox News Digital reported on a 2021 plan titled "Dismantling Racism and Advancing Equity, Diversity and Inclusion in the School of Medicine" for Duke Medical School. The guide called out standards such as dress codes, timeliness and individualism as examples of "White supremacy culture."
Dr. Kendall Conger also told Fox News Digital in 2024 that he was fired from Duke University's health system after speaking against the university's pledge against racism, which called racism a "public health crisis."
"It wasn't so much a pledge to better medicine, but a pledge to left-wing ideology. And so, I felt if I did not say anything, I was giving tacit approval to what was in the pledge," Conger said at the time.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
7 minutes ago
- Axios
San Antonio pools reflect a history of exclusion and change
Once symbols of racial exclusion, San Antonio's public pools are now targets for equity and reinvestment of millions of dollars in underserved areas. Why it matters: San Antonio is confronting its racist past, working to make pools more accessible in a city where cooling off is critical amid extreme heat. Flashback: In June 1954, six Black children swam at a public pool at Woodlawn Lake Park, pushing against an unwritten whites-only rule. White swimmers left, the pool shut for "repairs," and a cross was burned that night, per the Express-News. The next day — Juneteenth — the City Council formally banned Black residents from public pools. The ordinance remained until 1956, when pressure from Latino council members like Henry B. González and a federal lawsuit forced its repeal. Between the lines: In 1943, three Mexican American men sued after being denied entry to the privately owned Terrell Wells Pool, advertised as San Antonio's only "restricted" pool. A lower court ruled in their favor, but the Texas Supreme Court let segregation stand — exposing the contradiction of being counted as white by the U.S. Census, but still excluded in practice, per the Bullock Museum. What they're saying: " If there was one place the people were the most resistant to integrating, it was swimming pools, and it never really got a lot of attention," Francine Romero, a civil rights law expert and University of Texas at San Antonio professor, tells Axios. State of play: San Antonio's Parks and Recreation Department now uses tools like the Equity Atlas and community input to guide investment in underserved areas, spokesperson Connie Swann tells Axios. Recent and upcoming projects include:
Fox News
2 hours ago
- Fox News
DOJ assistant AG responds to new allegations in SJSU transgender volleyball controversy
EXCLUSIVE: U.S. Department of Justice Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon has spoken out in response to recent developments related to San Jose State University's transgender volleyball player from last fall. Dhillon responded to Fox News Digital's July 31 report with new allegations by former SJSU volleyball player Brooke Slusser related to a misconduct investigation into her former trans teammate, Blaire Fleming. Fleming was accused of conspiring with an opposing player to have Slusser spiked in the face during a match in October. "The Department of Justice has restored fairness to women's sports and will continue to go after bad actors who endanger young women with woke gender ideology. We will leverage every legal resource available to enforce Title IX and protect women's basic right to compete in sports without fear of retribution from men," Dhillon said in an exclusive statement to Fox News Digital. In November, a Mountain West Conference investigation into the initial allegations against Fleming concluded without finding "sufficient evidence" just three days after the first emails to witnesses to set up interviews were sent, according to public records obtained by Fox News Digital. The investigation was carried out by the law firm Willkie Farr & Gallagher (WFG). WFG was also hired by the Mountain West to defend the conference against a lawsuit by Slusser, which included the very same allegations against Fleming that the law firm cleared. Public records obtained by Fox News Digital show WFG attorney Tim Heaphy led the investigation into Fleming's alleged misconduct. Heaphy previously served as the chief investigative counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives select committee to investigate the January 6 capitol protests. Slusser told Fox News Digital she had a conversation with a teammate who was interviewed as part of the conference's investigation into Fleming's alleged plan. "Based on what I was told, exactly what one of my teammates had seen go on that night — about talking about the scouting report and leaving the net open — was told to those lawyers. So, that should have been sufficient evidence [of the alleged plan by Fleming]," Slusser said. "People are telling you this happened, and it's not second-hand information. She sat there and heard the conversation between Blaire and [former Colorado State volleyball player] Malaya [Jones]. So, to me, just from what I know without even having to dig deep into this investigation, there is sufficient evidence, and they were told sufficient evidence." Fox News Digital cannot independently verify that Slusser's teammate corroborated the allegations against Fleming when speaking to investigators. None of WFG's attorneys have been accused of violating any applicable rules of professional conduct. Now, Dhillon joins other GOP officials speaking out in response to the recent report. Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn, shared the report with the caption, "This is disgraceful, and this young woman should have never been forced to compete with a man in the first place." Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., shared the report on X and called for the NCAA and the Mountain West to conduct a new investigation. "It's a DISGRACE that we have universities who actively put female athletes in harm's way. NCAA and Mountain West need to hold a FULL INVESTIGATION IMMEDIATELY. Appreciate Brooke Slusser speaking out and fighting for female athletes. Keep it up!" Tuberville wrote. A White House spokesperson provided a statement to Fox News Digital last week addressing the report as well. "Women deserve to play sports without fear of being violated and harassed by biological men. President Trump is returning integrity to women's sports by ending the deranged left's policies that demean and endanger women," White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers said. In a lawsuit signed by 10 other current or former women's college volleyball players against the Mountain West and representatives of SJSU, Slusser alleged Fleming and other teammates sneaked out of a team hotel the night before an Oct. 3 match against Colorado State and met with an opposing player. The lawsuit alleged a teammate who sneaked out with Fleming later told players and coaches of an alleged plan by Fleming, in a conspiracy with the Colorado State player, to have Slusser spiked in the face during a match. The lawsuit and complaint alleged the players who sneaked out told other players and coaches they saw Fleming also hand over an SJSU scouting report with an agreement to throw the match in Colorado State's favor. Slusser said after she joined Riley Gaines' lawsuit against the NCAA in September, her interactions with trans athletes quickly turned hostile, citing her experience with Fleming. "After I joined the lawsuit, Blaire did not like me whatsoever. There was a time where Blaire said, 'I never want to speak to you again.' And I said, 'OK, that's fine,'" Slusser said. "I just knew there was hatred toward me from Blaire." Fox News Digital interviewed San Jose State athletic director Jeff Konya to inquire about Slusser's claims and other details of the investigation. However, Konya stood up after about five minutes of related questions and walked away, saying, "I'm done." Fox News Digital played a video clip of Slusser reciting these allegations to Konya at Mountain West media days July 15. "I have no idea if she's telling the truth or not," Konya said of Slusser's claims. Konya would not confirm or deny whether any of the witnesses interviewed corroborated the allegations against Fleming. When asked if he was satisfied with how the university handled the controversy involving Fleming in 2024, Konya said, "I think everybody acted in the best possible way they could, given the circumstances." The U.S. Department of Education opened a federal Title IX investigation into the situation involving Fleming and the university's handling of the trans athlete. The DOE recently reached agreements with other universities that allowed males to play on women's teams. On July 1, the DOE announced it had reached an agreement with the University of Pennsylvania to apologize to all female athletes that competed with transgender swimmer Lia Thomas in the 2021-22 season and to rescind all of Thomas' school records. Then, on Friday, the department announced a similar agreement with Wagner College in response to the school allowing transgender fencer Redmon Sullivan to compete on the women's fencing team. Education Secretary Linda McMahon previously told Fox News Digital her department will continue working to address the SJSU investigation. "Our investigation will continue," McMahon said. The DOJ has launched lawsuits against public officials in California and Maine for allowing males to compete in girls sports and refusing to come to an agreement with the Trump administration. Fox News Digital has reached out to SJSU, the Mountain West and WFG for a response to Dhillon's statement. When Fox News Digital previously asked the Mountain West if it would disclose any evidence from the investigation, particularly if any of the witnesses interviewed corroborated the allegations against Fleming, the conference declined. "With litigation ongoing, the Mountain West will have no further comment," a conference spokesperson said. San Jose State previously declined to respond to Slusser's claims. "Due to ongoing litigation and federal investigation, we are unable to respond to your inquiry," a university spokesperson told Fox News Digital. Fox News Digital has attempted to reach Fleming through social media for comment in response to Slusser's allegations.
Time Magazine
3 hours ago
- Time Magazine
Stanford Daily Sues Trump Administration
Stanford University's student newspaper is suing the Trump Administration over what it says is the government's attempts to target international students for immigration actions over the expression of pro-Palestinian views. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression filed the lawsuit Wednesday in federal court in San Jose, Calif., on behalf of the Stanford Daily, as well as two unnamed former students. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem are named as defendants. A spokesperson for Stanford University told Reuters that the student newspaper is an independent organization and that the university is not involved in the lawsuit. 'In the United States of America, no one should fear a midnight knock on the door for voicing the wrong opinion,' Conor Fitzpatrick, an attorney at FIRE, said in a statement. 'Free speech isn't a privilege the government hands out. Under our Constitution it is the inalienable right of every man, woman, and child.' The lawsuit has requested a preliminary injunction to block the government from attempting to deport students over pro-Palestinian speech while the case is ongoing. 'Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the Trump administration are trying to turn the inalienable human right of free speech into a privilege contingent upon the whims of a federal bureaucrat, triggering deportation proceedings against noncitizens residing lawfully in this country for their protected political speech regarding American and Israeli foreign policy,' the complaint says. The Stanford Daily was previously on the losing end of a Supreme Court case in 1978 over the search of its offices and seizure of evidence related to a crime—a protest demonstration where police officers were injured—that it had reported on but was not criminally involved in. That case ultimately led to Congress' passage in 1980 of the Privacy Protection Act, which protects journalists in such cases. Here's what to know about the new case and why the newspaper is once again hoping to defend not just its own student writers but a wider class of people whose rights it believes are being infringed. Targeting of foreign students The Trump Administration has used two provisions in the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 to target foreign-born students and censor pro-Palestinian speech, according to the lawsuit. The first provision, known as the Deportation Provision, gives the Secretary of State the authority to deport a noncitizen if he ''personally determines' their lawful 'beliefs, statements, or associations' 'compromise a compelling United States foreign policy interest,'' the lawsuit states. Rubio cited the provision to justify the attempted deportation of Palestinian Columbia graduate student Mahmoud Khalil, who had acted as a liaison between student protestors and university administrators during pro-Palestinian student demonstrations in 2024, and was arrested by immigration officers on March 8. In an April memo to an immigration judge overseeing Khalil's case, Rubio said that although Khalil's 'past, current or expected beliefs, statements, or associations … are otherwise lawful,' the Deportation Provision allows Rubio to 'personally determine' whether Khalil should be allowed to remain in the U.S. (Khalil was released from custody in June, and in July his attorneys filed for a preliminary injunction challenging the government's attempts to deport him on a separate immigration charge that alleges he misrepresented himself on his green card application). The second provision, known as the Revocation Provision, allows the Secretary of State to revoke a visa or documentation at his discretion. The Trump Administration has used this provision to revoke the visa of and detain Tufts University Ph.D. student Rumeysa Öztürk, who had co-authored a pro-Palestinian op-ed in the Tufts Daily before her detention and has since been released. 'We gave you a visa to come and study and get a degree, not to become a social activist that tears up our university campuses,' Rubio told reporters in May. 'If we've given you a visa and then you decide to do that, we're going to take it away.' The complaint argues that both provisions are unconstitutional when applied to protected speech: 'The First Amendment cements America's promise that the government may not subject a speaker to disfavored treatment because those in power do not like his or her message. And when a federal statute collides with First Amendment rights, the Constitution prevails.' The plaintiffs argue that the government's deportation threats and actions have amounted to violations of First Amendment rights. Since March, noncitizen writers of the Stanford Daily have declined to cover pro-Palestinian protests and asked to remove previous articles on the topic, fearing that such reporting could jeopardize their legal immigration status, according to the lawsuit. 'There's real fear on campus and it reaches into the newsroom,' Greta Reich, the student newspaper's editor-in-chief, said in a statement. 'I've had reporters turn down assignments, request the removal of some of their articles, and even quit the paper because they fear deportation for being associated with speaking on political topics, even in a journalistic capacity. The Daily is losing the voices of a significant portion of our student population.' The Trump Administration has also cracked down on international students more broadly. In April, the government quietly revoked the visas of thousands of students who had allegedly committed minor legal infractions before abruptly reversing the policy. The Administration has also used international students as a bargaining chip to compel university administrations to comply with certain demands, such as by attempting to revoke Harvard University's authority to enroll international students. And the government has heightened its scrutiny of student visa applicants, including vetting applicants' social media profiles for 'a history of political activism.' The Trump Administration's response 'DHS doesn't arrest people based on protected speech, so the plaintiffs' premise is incorrect,' DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement to media outlets. 'DHS takes its role in removing threats to the public and our communities seriously, and the idea that enforcing federal law in that regard constitutes some kind of prior restraint on speech is laughable.' A bench trial challenging the Trump Administration's alleged 'ideological deportation' policy concluded last month and a final ruling is expected this or next month. That lawsuit was filed by the American Association of University Professors and the Middle East Studies Association. During the course of the trial, a government memo unearthed in court revealed that officials had warned Rubio about potential legal scrutiny of deportation attempts because their basis could be considered constitutionally protected speech. 'Anyone who has any position that is against what the American government says they should think, they're immediately 'anti-American,'' David Rozas, an immigration attorney who represented Alireza Doroudi, an Iranian student who was detained for weeks and ultimately chose to self-deport, told TIME in May. 'America was built on discourse,' he added. Trump's immigration agenda, he said, is 'going to stifle American growth and the American dream.' '225 years after the Alien Friends Act expired, the danger of nighttime raids on noncitizens for perceived thoughtcrime is reality once more. Secretary Rubio and the Trump administration's war against noncitizens' freedom of speech is intended to send an unmistakable message: Watch what you say, or you could be next,' the complaint says. 'Message received.'
