No comment: Ohio's public universities quietly brace for DEI changes
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — Legislators are cracking down on diversity, equity and inclusion programs in higher education, and Ohio's public universities are working to get organized.
President Donald Trump has issued a slew of executive orders threatening funding for universities, and on Tuesday, the Department of Education sent a letter from the Office of Civil Rights requiring all educational institutions to abolish all race-conscious programming within two weeks or lose their federal funding. Ohio's public colleges are also facing pressure to change from Senate Bill 1, a substantial bill that passed the Ohio Senate on Feb. 12 and now heads to the House. See previous coverage of S.B. 1 in the video player above.
Ohio Senate's actions called 'undemocratic' after passing higher ed bill
Ohio universities have been relatively quiet as they sort through new and quickly changing requirements regarding DEI. NBC4 reached out to many public universities in Ohio, many of whom did not respond or said they could not comment.
One representative said they were unable to comment and would guess the university would not speak out until legislation became clearer. S.B. 1 passed in the Senate despite overwhelming public opposition but has yet to be scheduled for hearings in the House, where it heads next.
Ohio State chief spokesperson Benjamin Johnson said the university is in close contact with its federal partners to ensure the university is in compliance with federal mandates, particularly regarding research. Johnson said OSU created a webpage to help centralize information and resources pertaining to research so faculty and staff can keep working.
'We are reviewing the relevant executive orders,' Johnson said. 'As always, we will follow the law and work to ensure our students, faculty and staff have the resources needed to succeed.'
Statehouse exhibit honors Ohio native Toni Morrison, serves as censorship reminder
University of Cincinnati students received an email from the university president recently titled 'RE: Recent Policy Announcements' reaffirming the university's values and commitment to a welcoming environment. Ohio University has made similar comments, but neither university has taken a hard stance on the legislation.
Some universities are already making changes. The University of Akron recently decided against funding its annual 'Rethinking Race' series this year and said it was because of federal guidance on DEI.
As for S.B. 1, Johnson said OSU has not taken a stance on the matter. Ohio University released an explanatory message on S.B. 1 but did not state an opinion, just that it would provide updates and were watching it closely. Other institutions do not appear to have released statements.
OSU professor and president of its branch of the faculty advocacy group American Association of University Professors (AAUP) Pranav Jani said when a similar bill, S.B. 83, made waves in the last General Assembly, the Board of Trustees came out against it. Jani said he was disappointed this had not happened for S.B. 1.
Ohio lawmaker pressing hardline immigration bills
'I'm sure the Board of Trustees is also committed to the program, but it would have been a great support for those of us doing the work on the ground. At the end of the day, without faculty and students, there's no such thing as a university,' Jani said. 'I personally am bearing the brunt of some of the heat from the politicians, and it would have been nice for a huge and powerful institution like the Ohio State University to say our faculty are doing their jobs.'
'The university has not taken a position on Senate Bill 1. We will continue to work with elected officials on both sides of the aisle to advance Ohio State and ensure our students, faculty and staff have the resources and support needed to succeed,' Johnson said. 'Ohio State has an unwavering commitment to free speech and supports the right of our students, faculty and staff to speak out about issues that are important to them.'
When asked about previously coming out against S.B. 83, Johnson said the university often chooses not to comment on legislation, and that any comments occur on a bill-by-bill basis.
'It makes me feel completely unprotected,' Jani said. 'As president of AAUP at Ohio State, it confirms what we felt at S.B. 83: that no one's going to save us but ourselves.'
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
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US, China to Resume Trade Talks With Focus on Rare Earth Exports
(Bloomberg) -- Supply Lines is a daily newsletter that tracks global trade. Sign up here. Next Stop: Rancho Cucamonga! Where Public Transit Systems Are Bouncing Back Around the World ICE Moves to DNA-Test Families Targeted for Deportation with New Contract Trump Said He Fired the National Portrait Gallery Director. She's Still There. US Housing Agency Vulnerable to Fraud After DOGE Cuts, Documents Warn Top trade negotiators from the US and China are set to hold fresh talks in London on Monday, offering a glimmer of hope that the world's two largest economies can defuse tensions over Chinese dominance in rare-earth minerals. Both sides have accused the other of reneging on a deal in Geneva in May where they tried to start dialing back their trade war. Relations have spiraled since President Donald Trump's return to the White House, stoking uncertainty for companies and investors. China said Saturday it approved some applications for rare-earth exports, without specifying which countries or industries were involved — after Trump said Friday that Chinese President Xi Jinping had agreed to restart the flow of minerals and magnets using the materials. 'We want the rare earths, the magnets that are crucial for cell phones and everything else to flow just as they did before the beginning of April and we don't want any technical details slowing that down,' Kevin Hassett, head of the National Economic Council at the White House, said Sunday on CBS's Face the Nation. 'And that's clear to them.' US-China trade tensions escalated this year as a series of duty hikes on each other's goods sent tariffs well above 100% before hitting a pause. While the Geneva deal was meant to pave the way for a broader de-escalation, subsequent talks quickly stalled amid mutual recriminations. The US complained about a decline in shipments of rare-earth magnets essential for American electric vehicles and defense systems, while China bristled at tightened US restrictions on artificial intelligence chips from Huawei Technologies Co., access to other advanced technologies and crackdowns on foreign students in the US. Trump's reprieve on US tariffs for Chinese goods runs out in August, unless he decides to extend it. If deals aren't reached, the White House has said Trump plans to restore tariff rates to the levels he first announced in April, or lower numbers that exceed the current 10% baseline. In London, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer will meet a Chinese delegation led by Vice Premier He Lifeng. Trump offered a positive spin on what has been a rollercoaster relationship since he took office in January, saying on social media that the talks should go 'very well.' While a call between Trump and Xi last week generated some hope on Wall Street for lower duties between the trading partners, investors' optimism was limited. While promising to reshape US trading relationships, the US president has reached only one new trade agreement — with the UK. The Geneva meeting underscored the challenge of deal-making between China and the US. 'There was confusion and misunderstanding or misinterpretation intentionally on both sides, depending on how you look at it, about what was agreed to,' said Josh Lipsky, chair of international economics at the Atlantic Council. 'They left too many things open to interpretation and they all paid the price for it in the intervening weeks.' After the two leaders spoke, the Chinese Foreign Ministry said Trump told Xi that Chinese students are welcome to study in the US. Trump later said it would be his 'honor' to welcome them. For now, Xi appears to be betting that a reset in ties will lead to tangible wins in the weeks and months ahead, including tariff reductions, an easing of export controls and a less-fraught tone. The US and China 'just want to get back to where they were in Switzerland with a few more agreements down on paper to actually understand what is gonna be licensed, what gets permitted, what doesn't,' Lipsky said. The SEC Pinned Its Hack on a Few Hapless Day Traders. The Full Story Is Far More Troubling Cavs Owner Dan Gilbert Wants to Donate His Billions—and Walk Again Is Elon Musk's Political Capital Spent? What Does Musk-Trump Split Mean for a 'Big, Beautiful Bill'? Cuts to US Aid Imperil the World's Largest HIV Treatment Program ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Republicans Say They're Cool With Trump Deploying Troops Against Protesters
The U.S. secretary of defense has threatened to send active-duty Marines into the streets of Los Angeles to confront protesters opposing the administration's detention and deportation of immigrants. At least three prominent Republicans don't seem concerned about potential overreach. 'The [Department of Defense] is mobilizing the National Guard IMMEDIATELY to support federal law enforcement in Los Angeles. And, if violence continues, active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton will also be mobilized — they are on high alert,' Hegseth wrote late Saturday on X, formerly Twitter, on his personal account. This prompted ABC's Jonathan Karl to ask House Speaker Mike Johnson: 'Could we really see active duty Marines on the streets of Los Angeles?' 'One of our core principles is maintaining peace through strength,' Johnson said during an interview on Sunday's episode of This Week. 'We do that on foreign affairs and domestic affairs as well. I don't think that's heavy handed. I think that's an important signal.' 'You don't think sending Marines into the streets of an American city is heavy-handed?' Karl asked. 'We have to be prepared to do what is necessary, and I think the notice that that might happen might have the deterring effect,' Johnson said. Active-duty military troops have not been sent in to suppress unrest since the 1992 Los Angeles protests after a jury acquitted four white police officers in the beating of Rodney King, a Black man who was pulled over for a traffic violation. The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits federal troops from engaging in civilian law enforcement unless there is a clear legal or constitutional basis for doing so. It was created to restrict the president's ability to use the military against civilians. The exception to Posse Comitatus is the Insurrection Act, which Trump has not invoked. Instead, Trump invoked Title 10 of the U.S. Code on Armed Services, which limits the troops' actions to protecting federal officials rather than enforcing laws. Title 10 gives Trump authority to deploy the National Guard during 'a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States' and two other specific circumstances. Chris Mirasola of Lawfare wrote that Trump's justification for using this authority is 'factually contestable and, even on the face of the memorandum, unusually weak.' Republican Sen. James Lankford on NBC's Meet the Press argued that by deploying the National Guard, Trump is 'trying to deescalate all the tensions that are there.' Newsom has said that Trump activating National Guard troops is 'purposefully inflammatory and will only escalate tensions' 'This is an American city, and to be able to have an American city where we have people literally flying Mexican flags and saying, 'You cannot arrest us,' cannot be allowed,' Lankford said on Sunday. 'If someone violates the law, no matter what state that they're in, they're in violation of a federal law. They should face consequences for that.' Republican Sen. Markwayne Mullin also criticized protesters for carrying Mexican flags. 'They were literally out there protesting, carrying a foreign flag. That is absolutely insane. They are not just peaceful protesters. These are illegals,' he said Sunday on State of the Union. 'Carrying a flag is not illegal, as you know,' CNN's Dana Bash responded. 'Foreign flag while you're attacking law enforcement, it's pretty bad,' Mullin said. Carrying a Mexican flag and saying 'You cannot arrest us' is not a prosecutable offense. It is free speech protected by the First Amendment. And the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) has been clear that anyone found destructing property will be arrested. 'Everyone has the right to peacefully assemble and voice their opinions,' LAPD posted on X. 'However, vandalizing property and attempting to seriously injure officers, whether Federal or LAPD, is not peaceful.' When Meet the Press host Kristen Welker pointed out to Lankford that 'Governor Newsom says there is no unmet law enforcement need. The LAPD says the protests were peaceful,' the senator claimed that it is 'clear' that the LAPD is 'being overwhelmed.' (LAPD has not said they are overwhelmed.) 'This wouldn't be an issue if California didn't promote sanctuary city policies to be able to tell people literally, 'You can violate federal law and live in our state, and no one will arrest you for this,'' Lankford said. 'Now suddenly when they are arrested for federal crimes then suddenly they go into this kind of protest saying, 'No, you can't arrest us here. We're immune from federal law.' That's not true.' Here, Lankford is being misleading. Sanctuary city policies do not grant anyone immunity, they only limit how state and local resources are allocated to aid federal immigration enforcement. Under the Tenth Amendment, states have the right to allocate resources as they see fit, and states have used that amendment in court to justify not assisting with federal immigration raids. It's disturbing that prominent GOP lawmakers are signing on to the president's use of authority to activate the National Guard — against a governor's wishes — and signaling their agreement that deploying active duty Marines against civilians would be fine with them should Trump choose to do so. 'Don't kid yourself they know they are absolutely getting cooked politically [with] their terrible bill and rising prices, and they want to create a violent spectacle to feed their content machine,' Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz posted on X late Saturday. 'It's time for the mainstream media to describe this authoritarian madness accurately.' More from Rolling Stone Trump's Response to L.A. Protests: What We Know The Biggest Boondoggles in Trump's Big Beautiful Bill Donald Trump Is Destroying the Economy and Waging War on the Poor Best of Rolling Stone The Useful Idiots New Guide to the Most Stoned Moments of the 2020 Presidential Campaign Anatomy of a Fake News Scandal The Radical Crusade of Mike Pence
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Magic dust and mayhem: The Great GOP Panic over Trump's ‘Big Beautiful Bill'
Trump's so-called 'Big Beautiful Bill' narrowly passed the House by a single vote and is now stalled in the Senate. We take a closer look at this massive tax plan that gives permanent breaks for the wealthy while slashing Medicaid, food assistance, and clean energy programs. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, it would add at least $2.4 trillion to the national deficit–hardly a win for fiscal conservatives. Even Elon Musk slammed it as a 'disgusting abomination.��