Latest news with #anti-DEI
Boston Globe
3 hours ago
- Politics
- Boston Globe
N.H. public schools challenge constitutionality of anti-DEI provisions in newly adopted state budget
Advertisement Oyster River is among four public school districts in New Hampshire that signed on as plaintiffs. The other three are the Dover School District, the Somersworth School District, and the Grantham School District. They are joined by the National Education Association's New Hampshire affiliate as lead plaintiff, plus DEI consultant James M. McKim Jr., psychology professor Dottie Morris, and New Hampshire Outright, a nonprofit that offers training on fostering inclusion for LGBTQ+ students. Get N.H. Morning Report A weekday newsletter delivering the N.H. news you need to know right to your inbox. Enter Email Sign Up The lawsuit was filed by attorneys with the American Civil Liberties Union, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), the NEA, and Drummond Woodsum & MacMahon. A spokesperson for Republican Governor Kelly A. Ayotte, who signed the Advertisement Some of the plaintiffs in this lawsuit are also The The law directs New Hampshire's education commissioner to withhold all public funding from any public school the commissioner deems noncompliant with the law's anti-DEI provisions — which critics said gives one official too much authority to interpret and enforce a vague and politically charged rule. The lawsuit alleges the New Hampshire Department of Education had already begun taking steps to enforce the anti-DEI law in an arbitrary manner, before Davis was confirmed as commissioner. Zoe Brennan-Krohn, director of the ACLU Disability Rights Program, said the anti-DEI provisions represent 'an expansive assault on the rights and freedoms of students and educators' across New Hampshire. 'Among those potentially swept up in this vague law are Advertisement Brennan-Krohn said federal law mandates that public schools identify students with disabilities and seek to increase their achievement levels, and state law cannot prohibit what federal law requires — yet the text of this law purports to do just that. In prohibiting any ' Morris, the psychology professor, said she knows of several educators who will 'err on the side of caution' as a result of this law and refrain from engaging in an activity that might be perceived as DEI-related. 'The concern and fear of violating (the law's) directive will stifle educators' abilities to adequately serve all of their students, to create school environments that support students from diverse lived experiences, and to ethically engage in their vocation,' she said. In several key respects, this litigation echoes a still-pending legal dispute over the state's 2021 'banned concepts' law, which prohibited teaching that anyone is 'inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive.' Just as the 'banned concepts' law drew inspiration from a 'divisive concepts' executive order that President Trump issued during his first term, the anti-DEI law drew inspiration from an executive order Trump issued earlier this year. In both cases, lawmakers folded their hot-button proposals into the state budget, making a veto less likely. Advertisement The 'banned concepts' law was Steven Porter can be reached at
CNBC
6 days ago
- Business
- CNBC
Google has dropped more than 50 DEI-related organizations from its funding list
Google has purged more than 50 organizations related to diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, from a list of organizations that the tech company provides funding to, according to a new report. The company has removed a total of 214 groups from its funding list while adding 101, according to a new report from tech watchdog organization The Tech Transparency Project. The watchdog group cites the most recent public list of organizations that receive the most substantial contributions from Google's U.S. Government Affairs and Public Policy team. The largest category of purged groups were DEI-related, with a total of 58 groups removed from Google's funding list, TTP found. The dropped groups had mission statements that included the words "diversity, "equity," "inclusion," or "race," "activism," and "women." Those are also terms the Trump administration officials have reportedly told federal agencies to limit or avoid. In response to the report, Google spokesperson José Castañeda told CNBC that the list reflects contributions made in 2024 and that it does not reflect all contributions made by other teams within the company. "We contribute to hundreds of groups from across the political spectrum that advocate for pro-innovation policies, and those groups change from year to year based on where our contributions will have the most impact," Castañeda said in an email. Organizations that were removed from Google's list include the African American Community Service Agency, which seeks to "empower all Black and historically excluded communities"; the Latino Leadership Alliance, which is dedicated to "race equity affecting the Latino community"; and Enroot, which creates out-of-school experiences for immigrant kids. The organization funding purge is the latest to come as Google began backtracking some of its commitments to DEI over the last couple of years. That pull back came due to cost cutting to prioritize investments into artificial intelligence technology as well as the changing political and legal landscape amid increasing national anti-DEI policies. Over the past decade, Silicon Valley and other industries used DEI programs to root out bias in hiring, promote fairness in the workplace and advance the careers of women and people of color — demographics that have historically been overlooked in the workplace. However, the U.S. Supreme Court's 2023 decision to end affirmative action at colleges led to additional backlash against DEI programs in conservative circles. President Donald Trump signed an executive order upon taking office in January to end the government's DEI programs and directed federal agencies to combat what the administration considers "illegal" private-sector DEI mandates, policies and programs. Shortly after, Google's Chief People Officer Fiona Cicconi told employees that the company would end DEI-related hiring "aspirational goals" due to new federal requirements and Google's categorization as a federal contractor. Despite DEI becoming such a divisive term, many companies are continuing the work but using different language or rolling the efforts under less-charged terminology, like "learning" or "hiring." Even Google CEO Sundar Pichai maintained the importance diversity plays in its workforce at an all-hands meeting in March. "We're a global company, we have users around the world, and we think the best way to serve them well is by having a workforce that represents that diversity," Pichai said at the time. One of the groups dropped from Google's contributions list is the National Network to End Domestic Violence, which provides training, assistance, and public awareness campaigns on the issue of violence against women, the TTP report found. The group had been on Google's list of funded organizations for at least nine years and continues to name the company as one of its corporate partners. Google said it still gave $75,000 to the National Network to End Domestic Violence in 2024 but did not say why the group was removed from the public contributions list.
The Guardian
25-07-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
Trump is fighting to kill off DEI – and the corporate cowardice over Gaza shows he's winning
I have been working in diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) for more than six years. This year, more than ever, I have started to question what the purpose of it really is. Though I've been celebrating companies that took a stand against Donald Trump's anti-DEI executive orders, under the radar I have noticed an insidious censorship rearing its head. Since 2023 we have been witness to one of the worst atrocities of our lifetimes. Livestreamed to our phones, we have seen the slaughter of at least 58,000 Palestinians, more than 17,000 of them children, and many of them in hospitals, schools, refugee camps and food queues. We have seen the denial of water, electricity and medical supplies, the obliteration of communities, mass manmade starvation, and continued calls by Israeli ministers for the permanent expulsion or eradication of Palestinians in Gaza. Israel's plans for a so-called humanitarian city to be built on the ruins of Rafah has been described by the former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert as a 'concentration camp'. Yet, although more than 200 companies released statements after the Hamas attack on 7 October 2023 – wholeheartedly condemning it and donating money to relief funds – since then, there has been a relative silence in the face of the ongoing destruction in Gaza. One senior manager I spoke to said he had received an email telling him to remind staff they weren't allowed to wear 'political' badges during the Gaza conflict. Another company leader firmly stated, 'We're an apolitical company. Our staff need to remember that.' Last year, 50 employees were fired by Google after protesting against its and Amazon's $1.2bn (£900m) Project Nimbus cloud infrastructure contract with the Israeli government. And just last weekend we saw an official at the Royal Opera House attempt to snatch the Palestinian flag from a cast member who unfurled it on stage after a performance. All these organisations have DEI agendas. They say they are committed to inclusion and equal opportunity, and to enhancing business growth through diversity. Yet it seems this commitment is conditional on people's silence. You can belong, as long as you don't make us uncomfortable. We value your identity, as long as it's not political. Yet the companies themselves are not devoid of politics. A recent report by the UN special rapporteur for Palestinian territories, Francesca Albanese, backed by a number of high-profile economists, exposes the vast number of businesses who have been enabling or profiting from the Israeli military operation in Gaza. 'The report shows why the genocide carried out by Israel continues … because it is lucrative for many,' it says, highlighting not just arms manufacturers but also the complicity of big tech, household brands and even educational institutions. and Airbnb have been listing properties in illegal Israeli settlements, enabling profit from stolen land. And, in the most stark cases of corporate hypocrisy, companies such as BAE Systems, which is directly tied to the Israeli military machine and dehumanisation of Palestinians, proudly brand themselves as champions of dignity and respect. For the first time, I have found myself questioning not just how we do DEI work, but whether it means anything at all. If DEI is about rewiring unjust systems, how can companies silence staff who speak out or, worse, actively profit from a brutal war machine, and still claim to be inclusive? What is the role of DEI, if not to embed values and basic humanity within the company? What is even more frustrating is that we have a direct blueprint of how business leaders can approach this. Since the invasion of Ukraine, more than 1,000 companies have voluntarily curtailed operations in Russia as a recognition that they don't stand for war crimes, the murder of civilians or the ensuing humanitarian crisis. They hung Ukrainian flags on their buildings, donated tens of millions to humanitarian organisations, offered housing and created fast-track hiring schemes for Ukrainian refugees. The Royal Opera House itself published a statement in support of Ukraine, lit up its building in the Ukrainian flag colours, and for a period of time played the Ukrainian national anthem before every performance. For many staff, this contrast makes the corporate silence on Gaza feel even more pointed. It's not 'apolitical', it's a choice. And it is a failure of DEI, which at its core is about challenging systems that breed inequality. It is rooted in values of fairness, dignity and respect for all. This isn't simply about respecting racial or religious difference on an interpersonal level, it's about who you invest in (or divest from), what you choose to speak out on, how you balance profit with purpose. To stay silent in the face of mass violence sends a clear message: some lives don't matter. What gives me hope is the people-powered movements within companies. Staff are holding their leaders to account. Be that employees at the Boston Consulting Group who shared a letter to the company's top management demanding an end to its involvement in the development of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, staff at the Berlin-based retail company Zalando protesting against the dismissal of an Arab employee who criticised its support of Israel, or the more than 100 BBC staff who spoke out against censorship in its reporting of Israel/Palestine. These ordinary workers are taking up the mantle where DEI is failing. We need to move away from this current sanitised, apolitical version of DEI towards one with meaning. Core values of dignity, humanity and fairness need to be integral to business decisions, not just corporate buzzwords. If you stand for nothing, you will fall for anything. And that's not a DEI I want to be part of. Jinan Younis is the founder of diversity, equity and inclusion agency WeCalibrate and former assistant politics editor at gal-dem magazine
The Guardian
25-07-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
Trump is fighting to kill off DEI – and the corporate cowardice over Gaza shows he's winning
I have been working in diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) for more than six years. This year, more than ever, I have started to question what the purpose of it really is. Though I've been celebrating companies that took a stand against Donald Trump's anti-DEI executive orders, under the radar I have noticed an insidious censorship rearing its head. Since 2023 we have been witness to one of the worst atrocities of our lifetimes. Livestreamed to our phones, we have seen the slaughter of at least 58,000 Palestinians, more than 17,000 of them children, and many of them in hospitals, schools, refugee camps and food queues. We have seen the denial of water, electricity and medical supplies, the obliteration of communities, mass manmade starvation, and continued calls by Israeli ministers for the permanent expulsion or eradication of Palestinians in Gaza. Israel's plans for a so-called humanitarian city to be built on the ruins of Rafah has been described by the former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert as a 'concentration camp'. Yet, although more than 200 companies released statements after the Hamas attack on 7 October 2023 – wholeheartedly condemning it and donating money to relief funds – since then, there has been a relative silence in the face of the ongoing destruction in Gaza. One senior manager I spoke to said he had received an email telling him to remind staff they weren't allowed to wear 'political' badges during the Gaza conflict. Another company leader firmly stated, 'We're an apolitical company. Our staff need to remember that.' Last year, 50 employees were fired by Google after protesting against its and Amazon's $1.2bn (£900m) Project Nimbus cloud infrastructure contract with the Israeli government. And just last weekend we saw an official at the Royal Opera House attempt to snatch the Palestinian flag from a cast member who unfurled it on stage after a performance. All these organisations have DEI agendas. They say they are committed to inclusion and equal opportunity, and to enhancing business growth through diversity. Yet it seems this commitment is conditional on people's silence. You can belong, as long as you don't make us uncomfortable. We value your identity, as long as it's not political. Yet the companies themselves are not devoid of politics. A recent report by the UN special rapporteur for Palestinian territories, Francesca Albanese, backed by a number of high-profile economists, exposes the vast number of businesses who have been enabling or profiting from the Israeli military operation in Gaza. 'The report shows why the genocide carried out by Israel continues … because it is lucrative for many,' it says, highlighting not just arms manufacturers but also the complicity of big tech, household brands and even educational institutions. and Airbnb have been listing properties in illegal Israeli settlements, enabling profit from stolen land. And, in the most stark cases of corporate hypocrisy, companies such as BAE Systems, which is directly tied to the Israeli military machine and dehumanisation of Palestinians, proudly brand themselves as champions of dignity and respect. For the first time, I have found myself questioning not just how we do DEI work, but whether it means anything at all. If DEI is about rewiring unjust systems, how can companies silence staff who speak out or, worse, actively profit from a brutal war machine, and still claim to be inclusive? What is the role of DEI, if not to embed values and basic humanity within the company? What is even more frustrating is that we have a direct blueprint of how business leaders can approach this. Since the invasion of Ukraine, more than 1,000 companies have voluntarily curtailed operations in Russia as a recognition that they don't stand for war crimes, the murder of civilians or the ensuing humanitarian crisis. They hung Ukrainian flags on their buildings, donated tens of millions to humanitarian organisations, offered housing and created fast-track hiring schemes for Ukrainian refugees. The Royal Opera House itself published a statement in support of Ukraine, lit up its building in the Ukrainian flag colours, and for a period of time played the Ukrainian national anthem before every performance. For many staff, this contrast makes the corporate silence on Gaza feel even more pointed. It's not 'apolitical', it's a choice. And it is a failure of DEI, which at its core is about challenging systems that breed inequality. It is rooted in values of fairness, dignity and respect for all. This isn't simply about respecting racial or religious difference on an interpersonal level, it's about who you invest in (or divest from), what you choose to speak out on, how you balance profit with purpose. To stay silent in the face of mass violence sends a clear message: some lives don't matter. What gives me hope is the people-powered movements within companies. Staff are holding their leaders to account. Be that employees at the Boston Consulting Group who shared a letter to the company's top management demanding an end to its involvement in the development of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, staff at the Berlin-based retail company Zalando protesting against the dismissal of an Arab employee who criticised its support of Israel, or the more than 100 BBC staff who spoke out against censorship in its reporting of Israel/Palestine. These ordinary workers are taking up the mantle where DEI is failing. We need to move away from this current sanitised, apolitical version of DEI towards one with meaning. Core values of dignity, humanity and fairness need to be integral to business decisions, not just corporate buzzwords. If you stand for nothing, you will fall for anything. And that's not a DEI I want to be part of. Jinan Younis is the founder of diversity, equity and inclusion agency WeCalibrate and former assistant politics editor at gal-dem magazine
The Independent
24-07-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Trump reviewing displays at museum that houses the Liberty Bell for violating his anti-DEI orders
The Trump administration has ordered a review of several items at Philadelphia 's Independence National Historical Park — the museum where the Liberty Bell is kept — because they fall outside of Donald Trump 's anti-DEI rules, according to a new report. The move is apparently part of a broader move to fight"corrosive ideology" at national parks, says the New York Times. Independence Park is home not only to the Liberty Bell, but to Independence Hall, where both the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution were signed. Back in March, Trump issued an order demanding the censoring of any information at federal parks, public monuments, or statues added since 2020 that "perpetuate a false reconstruction of American history." Federal employees had until last week to flag any displays or materials that failed Trump's ideological purity test, according to the Times. The "corrosive ideology" found at Independence Park reportedly includes a panel at the Liberty Bell describing its 1800s travel and which addresses the 'systemic and violent racism and sexism that existed at the time.' An outdoor exhibit at the President's House — where George Washington and John Adams lived and conducted business while in Philadelphia — notes nine of Washington's slaves and includes descriptions of the brutality that slaves faced. Under Trump's guidance, that must also be censored. Independence Park also has displays noting the contentious relationship between the U.S. and Native American tribes. They have been flagged by federal staff. The Trump administration also allowed the public a period of time to offer feedback on Independence Park and the wokeness or lack of wokeness in its exhibits. The U.S. Interior Department received fewer than 20 comments, according to Axios. The deadline for federal workers to remove all the "inappropriate" content from federally managed land and monuments is September 17, according to the Times. Trump may be especially eager to get the Philadelphia sites censored to his liking, considering the nation's upcoming 250th anniversary will be celebrated in the city of brotherly love. The celebrations are expected to draw many out-of-state visitors, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer.
