Michael Burry, the legendary investor who predicted the 2008 crash, just made his biggest bearish bet ever – a staggering $1.6 billion against the U.S. stock market. He’s not just talking about a crash anymore; he’s putting his money where his mouth is. Even more shocking? He’s completely exited his U.S. positions and is betting big on China.
The Department of Education is on the Trump chopping block. Details have not been fully released yet, but the president has signaled plans to dismantle it and move some of its key functions elsewhere. The department oversees student loans, federal funds for lower-income students, special education programs and more. Geoff Bennett discussed more with Laura Meckler of The Washington Post.
On February 10, 2025, students and activists gathered at the CUNY College Board of Trustees Public Hearing to demand divestment. Rabbi Dovid Feldman stood in solidarity with the students, supporting their call for justice and urging them not to be intimidated by false Zionist accusations.
This powerful moment highlights the growing movement for divestment and the unwavering courage of those standing up for what is right. The rallying cry was clear: “Divest! We will not stop; we will not rest!”
Here I look into the past month of Trump’s actions and see how they might shape long-term trends. Specifically I touch on demographics, climate change, populism, technology, and a bit more. It’s a weird way to celebrate my birthday, but hopefully a productive one.
Evidence suggests that significant numbers of students experience or are affected by harassment and sexual misconduct each year. Yet student complaints to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA) about harassment and sexual misconduct have historically formed a very small proportion of our overall caseload.
The number of complaints about harassment and sexual misconduct we have received has been rising slowly but steadily in recent months. This may in part be a result of greater visibility at providers about mechanisms to disclose, such as “report and support” tools. This is a positive step, but there is more to be done to raise students’ confidence in how their providers can respond to reports.
Today we have published ten case summaries and a casework note on harassment and sexual misconduct, highlighting some key issues for providers to consider when addressing complaints. Although these examples focus on sexual misconduct, the broad principles of good practice can apply across other forms of harassment.
Our recent casework shows that some providers are demonstrating, via the disciplinary action they take against students reported for harassment and sexual misconduct, how seriously they view breaches of their codes of conduct. We’ve seen providers taking swift action to investigate, make findings and apply penalties. In some cases, we have seen well-reasoned and documented decisions and clearly explained outcomes.
However, we have upheld a high proportion of the complaints we have reviewed about harassment and sexual misconduct. We have identified procedural errors and unfairness that have significantly undermined the value of the process for reporting students, and the validity of findings made against reported students.
Overall, providers seem to have more confidence in addressing the disciplinary aspect of these complaints. Disciplinary processes are usually well established and are supported by guidance and tools such as classification of the severity of any breaches of a code of conduct and accompanying tariffs of penalties.
There is less certainty and consistency of approach across the sector in responding to the reporting student. There may be fine nuances between a disclosure, a report or a complaint about harassment and sexual misconduct, and the manner of response to each might be slightly different. Many providers intend to be led by the reporting student’s needs, which is an admirable principle – but not always effective if the student has not been clearly informed about the options available to them and the differences between these routes.
In several cases, providers haven’t understood that informing a reporting student that a disciplinary process has taken place is not a complete outcome.
Providers need to consider how they can support students and lessen the impact upon them of the harassment or sexual misconduct they have experienced. This is especially important when the report concerns the conduct of a member of staff. In our experience, providers have tended to be more transparent about incidents between two students than they have been when a member of staff is involved.
While providers have particular responsibilities to their employees that may be different to the obligations they have towards students, the imbalance of power makes it even more important that students understand how their complaint has been investigated and what will happen next.
We recognise that complaints about harassment and sexual misconduct are often complex, and may involve events that unfold over a period of time, multiple incidents or involve numerous individuals. There can be constraints because of concurrent police action, which may not result in a clear outcome for several months. Cases may involve claims and counter-complaints, or turn on the credibility of the parties on nuanced issues such as consent.
Our experience suggests that in some cases, decision makers have not fully understood the importance of moving carefully through a process that genuinely gives all parties an opportunity to tell their own story and allows for gaps and inconsistencies to be explored. It is right that all parties in these processes must be treated with respect, with kindness, and with an awareness of the impact that re-visiting an experience of harassment or sexual misconduct may have.
But panel members who must test evidence appear to feel constrained in asking questions. Trying to re-examine or gather additional evidence at a later date can place an undue burden on all parties and prevent individuals from moving forward.
The increased focus on tackling harassment and sexual misconduct across the sector – including the new E6 OfS regulatory condition that applies to some of the providers in our membership – is to be welcomed. The emphasis on clear information that is easy to access, and on well-resourced training for both staff and students may go some way to addressing some issues we have seen in complaints.
In 2025, we will consult on a new section of the Good Practice Framework addressing these complex issues. It will build on the learning we have identified from our rising volume of casework. Our intention will be to draw together in one place the principles that apply to complaints about harassment and misconduct.
We look forward to engaging with the sector to benefit from the extensive expertise of hands-on practitioners, to make this as useful a resource as possible. If you’d like to feed in at an early stage, please get in touch with us at [email protected].
We all know higher education has undergone a seismic shift from being a stable, traditional environment in the late twentieth century to a dynamic, complex and fast-moving sector. This transformation isn’t only in the UK – it’s global as well.
Leaders in higher education are now tasked with navigating political and regulatory changes, financial pressures, shifts in social dynamics and technological advancements. And that’s before they are faced with enhancement challenges like building student experience initiatives or boosting research impact.
In the past, leadership has perhaps been viewed as something of an anathema in academia, but its importance today permeates every level of an organisation. It is now a crucial component in the higher education sector’s efforts to successfully navigate current challenges.
We’ve created the Framework for Leading in Higher Education to address these multifaceted issues which can’t be left to executive teams alone. What’s needed most is a joined-up approach, engaging formal and informal leaders right across the institution. The mission, vision and values need to feel intuitive and fitting, so that, in an ideal world, everyone would want to frame their actions around the strategic plans to meet them and to feel part of the bigger picture. And this alignment must be two-way, fostering a sense of ownership and inclusivity, whether it’s about building inclusive cultures or understanding financial imperatives.
The story of our framework began in 2021 when Doug Parkin, former Principal Consultant at Advance HE and a research team led by Richard Watermeyer from the University of Bristol asked a deceptively simple question: “what works for leadership in higher education?” This question sparked a literature search and a scoping study, engaging leaders at all levels and functions from around the world. This was followed by Advance HE’s Leadership Survey, published in 2023.
After the report’s publication, we convened a rather brilliant steering group of colleagues from the UK, Australia and the Middle East, chaired by Ben Calvert, vice chancellor at the University of South Wales, and Shân Waring, vice chancellor at Middlesex University. We engaged with the sector through roundtables and workshops in the UK, Australia and Southeast Asia initially, to understand if a framework was wanted and then to determine its details.
The desire for a framework was clear.
We heard repeatedly about the importance of elevating leadership as a career path alongside research or teaching and supporting learning. The need for a common understanding and vocabulary around higher education leadership came across loud and clear.
In the back of our minds throughout all of this was a sense of disconnection between people and institutions. A sense that, sometimes, leadership is like wading through treacle with an intensity of policies, regulations and workload holding us back from being the leaders that we want to be. Unfortunately, the framework can’t shift all the treacle, but it might help find some pathways through, help to join-up thinking across institutions and help us to make friends with the structures, strategies and resources that are needed to sustain the whole organisation.
The framework is designed for leaders, aspiring leaders and those involved in leadership and organisational development. It’s intended for a global audience, recognising the many ways to lead in higher education across diverse cultures, contexts, structures and institutions.
Leadership happens throughout an institution, and this framework enables engagement from leaders operating formally and informally, from institutional to individual contributors, and from aspiring leaders to highly experienced ones. It’s designed to be inclusive in terms of culture, geography, institution type, level of responsibility, experience, and function.
At the core of the framework are three sets of leadership attributes, encompassing “knowledge and understanding”, “values and mindsets”, and “skills and applications”. Each of these is broken down into five dimensions for deeper exploration.
Moving outward, the framework articulates the context in which the leader operates: place, people and practice. The outer ring, intentionally blurred to remind us that the lines between individual attributes, context and institutional goals are never clearly defined, and that disruption is most likely to occur in those grey zones.
We’ve then defined three essential functions of university leadership as:
You might be tempted to ask, “is everyone supposed to do all of that?” To which, thankfully, the answer is no.
This is an all-encompassing framework, and not all leaders will engage with every aspect. Less experienced leaders might focus on a few of the dimensions, while senior leaders might engage across all of them. Similarly, not everyone will be involved in every function of the outer circle, but everyone will be directly or indirectly involved in some aspects.
Leaders seeking self-development might use the framework for individual reflection, considering their strengths and areas for development, and how their organisation’s people, places and practices support or impede their progress. New leaders might use the framework to understand leadership in the context of higher education, considering their strengths and experiences, and how these contribute to the outer wheel’s functions. Leaders preparing for promotion might reflect on past impacts, connect them to leadership attributes, and identify further development needs.
Team leaders and leadership developers might assess team strengths and attributes, understand how context shapes performance, and use the framework for future-focused conversations. Institutions might use this framework to inform their own context-specific leadership frameworks and development programs.
Organisation development and learning and development professionals might consider the cultural and development needs of their leaders, ideally in consultation with them, to determine necessary structures and interventions for succession planning or responding to change initiatives.
We’ll be launching the framework over several months, with podcasts, interviews, seminars and workshops in the UK, Australia, Europe and the Middle East.
We want the sector to experiment, test it out, and help us shape it into something that will have a lasting impact. In the future, we’re looking at building accreditation to recognise those leading in higher education, similar to how we currently recognise those in teaching and supporting learning with the Professional Standards Framework.
We welcome thoughts, suggestions and feedback on this as well. And if you are involved in research activities in this area, we’d be delighted to hear from you.
Find out more about the Framework for Leading in Higher Education.
GERMANTOWN, Tenn., Feb. 12, 2025 — Christmas in Germantown, Tennessee, might be merry and bright, but be careful if your decorations give a fright: you might get dragged into court and fined.
Today, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression filed a federal lawsuit seeking to strike down on First Amendment grounds the Memphis suburb’s ordinance dictating to residents how and when they’re allowed to display holiday decorations. On Thursday, FIRE will also defend Alexis Luttrell before a municipal court, after the Germantown resident was cited for celebrating Christmas with decorative skeletons.
“There is simply no good reason for the government to care how and when a resident celebrates a holiday in their own front yard,” said FIRE attorney Colin McDonell. “When government officials try to stop that resident from expressing their holiday spirit to others, that violates the First Amendment.”
In October, Alexis set up a decorative skeleton and skeleton dog in her front yard to celebrate Halloween. Then for Election Day, she used the same skeletons to hold political signs. But in December, a Germantown code officer left a notice that she was in violation of Ordinance 11-33, which decrees that home and yard holiday decorations “shall not be installed or placed more than 45 days before the date of the holiday” and must be removed within “30 days, following the date of the holiday.”
So Alexis updated her skeletons for Christmas, dressing them up for the holiday alongside her inflatable tree and Santa Claus.
But Germantown still had (ahem) a bone to pick. On Jan. 6, she received a citation from the city saying she was still in violation and that she would have to appear before a judge on Feb. 13. If found guilty, she could be subject to fines, a court order prohibiting skeletons in her holiday displays, and even city officials entering her property and forcibly removing the skeletons.
“You don’t have to like my decorations, but that doesn’t mean Germantown has the right to force me to take them down,” said Alexis. “This is America. Even our local government has to respect our rights.”
COURTESY PHOTOS OF ALEXIS AND HER HOLIDAY DISPLAYS
Germantown’s ordinance violates the First Amendment, no bones about it. To start, it targets residents’ displays based on their message — specifically, whether they celebrate a holiday. It’s perfectly legal to have miniature deer figurines in your yard year-round, for example . . . unless there’s nine of them and one of them has a red nose. The Supreme Court has long held that speech restrictions based on content are unconstitutional unless they are narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest.
“City governments can impose reasonable restrictions on yard displays that address concerns like safety, noise, or light pollution, but Alexis’s decorations aren’t harming anyone,” said McDonell. “Germantown is simply targeting protected expression.”
The ordinance is also unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination because it allows government officials to enforce their own subjective views on what decorations may celebrate a particular holiday. By refusing to permit Alexis’s skeletons as an acceptable Christmas display, Germantown is telling residents they have to celebrate Christmas the government-approved “right” way, even if they have a macabre sense of humor or just enjoy “The Nightmare Before Christmas.”
How one celebrates a holiday should be dictated by their personal taste, not government officials. And many religions and cultures have different ideas of when a holiday falls or how it should be celebrated that defy Germantown’s narrow view:
Lastly, Germantown’s ordinance is unconstitutionally vague. Regulations have to be clear enough for the average person to know if they’re breaking the law or not, but the ordinance offers no guidance on what decorations are “intended” to celebrate a particular “holiday.” As a result, Germantown residents are constantly in the dark about which holidays their city will enforce, when they officially begin, and which decorations qualify for that holiday — and which are forbidden.
Alexis’s skeletons are currently dressed, for example, in a “Love is Love” theme. St. Valentine’s Day isn’t an official government holiday — but then neither is Halloween, and Germantown officials targeted her skeletons nonetheless. Her rainbow-colored decorations are intended as a Valentine’s Day message — but it’s also imagery about LGBT acceptance that many people display year-round. Alexis can only guess at whether her display meets the city’s definition.
With FIRE on her side, Alexis is fighting this unconstitutional ordinance. Once Valentine’s Day has passed, she has plans to put her skeletons in costumes for St. Patrick’s Day, Easter, Pride Month and other holidays this year and for years to come.
“Perhaps for President’s Day, I’ll dress the skeleton like a Founding Father and give him a copy of the Constitution,” said Alexis. “Maybe a visual display will make it finally sink in when they ask me to tear it down.”
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to defending and sustaining the individual rights of all Americans to free speech and free thought — the most essential qualities of liberty. FIRE educates Americans about the importance of these inalienable rights, promotes a culture of respect for these rights, and provides the means to preserve them.
CONTACT:
Alex Griswold, Communications Campaign Manager, FIRE: 215-717-3473; [email protected]
Think about the last time you ordered something online or streamed your favourite show. Remember how pretty seamless it was? That’s exactly what today’s students expect from their college application experience. Gen Z and Gen Alpha students have grown up in a digital world, with all its associated benefits. You have to acknowledge that they’re looking for the same smooth, user-friendly experience when they apply to schools, and this is no easy task.
For colleges and universities, meeting these expectations isn’t just about staying current–it’s about staying relevant. This is why having a well-designed student portal is more important than ever. It is the key to a seamless admissions process–the map that charts a direct, straightforward course from the students’ first click to their first day on campus.
Try the HEM Student Portal!
Remember the days of printing out application forms, filling them in by hand, and mailing them back? Those days are long gone, replaced by a more efficient and convenient solution. Today’s students want everything at their fingertips, and they want it to work as smoothly as their favourite apps. A recent study found that 70% of students expect their university’s online experience to match platforms like Amazon, Netflix, and Facebook.
That’s a high bar to meet, but it is the type of bar that a well-designed portal can scale. So what is the purpose of a student portal? A student portal is an online resource that guides students and helps them access helpful resources throughout the journey from exploring to application, enrollment, and beyond.
As education becomes increasingly global, schools are seeing applications from all corners of the world. International students need a system that works across time zones and cultures, making the application process clear and accessible no matter where they’re from. A good student portal can meet these students at the point of their needs and help them achieve all their short and long-term goals.
Example: The University of London’s student portal offers a comprehensive and user-friendly interface, providing students with easy access to academic resources, course materials, and administrative services.
Source: University of London
Let’s talk about some challenges schools face without a proper portal:
Picture an admissions office drowning in paperwork, trying to match documents to applications, and manually entering data into multiple systems. Now imagine students waiting anxiously for updates, wondering if their materials were received, or trying to figure out what steps come next. The challenges are well outlined below to put things in perspective:
These are the kinds of headaches a good student portal eliminates. A well-designed portal tackles these issues head-on by:
These solutions will help make student applications as easy as online shopping. Students can track their progress in real time and receive automatic updates and reminders. You’re giving admissions staff the tools they need to work efficiently and students, more control over how things pan out. All you need is an efficient student login system and you’ll have everything within a click.
This brings us to the question–what is the student login system? A student login system allows students to access everything from application progress to status, academic records, courses, schedules, and campus services through their institution’s online portal, using a username and password.
Example: The Higher Education Marketing (HEM) Student Portal is a comprehensive digital platform designed to streamline student engagement, lead nurturing, and admissions processes for educational institutions. It offers a user-friendly interface where prospective and enrolled students can access personalized information, track application statuses, and access financial aid.
Source: HEM
Gone are the days of juggling multiple systems and endless email chains. Modern student portals make applying to academic institutions as straightforward as creating a social media profile. Students can choose their program, pick their campus, and select their start date all in one place. Need to upload transcripts or recommendation letters? Just drag and drop them into the system.
For admissions staff, this means no more shuffling between databases or wondering where a particular document ended up. Everything lives in one place, making it easy to review applications and make decisions quickly. The system even connects with other school software, thanks to the portal integrating with a CRM or SIS, so information flows smoothly and in real-time from one department to another.
Here’s where things get interesting. Imagine having a virtual assistant that never sleeps, sending out reminders, updating application statuses, and answering common questions automatically. That’s what automation brings to the table.
For example, when a student submits their application, the system can automatically:
This is not just about saving time—though it certainly does. It is about ensuring a consistent and reliable experience for every applicant while allowing staff the resources to focus on more meaningful interactions with students.
Modern portals offer innovative tools that make the application process feel more like a personal journey than a bureaucratic maze.
The Virtual Admissions Assistant (VAA), for example, can serve as a knowledgeable and accessible resource for prospective students. It enables them to independently explore campus options, browse programs, and receive immediate responses to their inquiries at any time. The VAA functions as a personal guide throughout the admissions process.
Then there’s the Quote Builder – a game-changer for students trying to plan their education budget. Instead of struggling with complicated fee structures, students can simply input their choices (program, campus, housing preferences) and get a clear picture of their costs. For international students especially, this transparency is invaluable. No more surprises or hidden fees – just clear, upfront information they can use to plan their future.
Example: The Automotive Training Center, Surrey, offers prospects the opportunity to request information about their admission from a virtual admission assistant, or an admission representative.
Source: ATC Surrey
One thing that students and staff love is finding everything in one place. Remember that feeling of searching through endless email threads looking for that one important document? A good portal eliminates that headache.
For students, it means:
For staff, it’s like having a super-organized digital filing cabinet where everything is just a click away. Whatever you need to do, from sending students a reminder to checking their application status or when they last logged in, you only need to Click.
Example: The MyUCLA App by the University of California, Los Angeles, is a one-stop-shop student-run portal that offers everything from academic to administrative, student engagement, and financial support.
Source: MyUCLA
Online application management is an area where modern portals shine. A well-designed portal system will keep students engaged throughout the process instead of waiting for them to reach out with questions or concerns.
For example, The system can pick up that a student began an application but hasn’t completed it. Rather than letting that potential student slip away, it automatically sends a friendly reminder, offering help with any questions they might have. This kind of thoughtful follow-up can make the difference between a completed application and one that gets abandoned.
Now, let’s talk about something you’ve probably heard before. What is the student journey? The student journey begins with exploration and moves to application, admission, and enrollment. Beyond that, it involves academic learning, campus involvement, career preparation, and other experiences that shape their overall education and personal growth.
Now that we’ve gotten that out of the way, let’s follow Sarah, a prospective student, through her application journey:
Day 1: Sarah discovers your school’s portal and completes a quick inquiry form. Within minutes, she receives a personalized email with virtual tour links and program information tailored to her interests.
Week 1: Using the Virtual Admission Assistant (AAA), she explores different programs and campuses. The system notices she’s particularly interested in paralegal training and automatically sends her information.
Week 2: Sarah uses the Quote Builder to calculate her costs, including housing and tuition plans. The transparency helps her and her parents make informed decisions about financing her education.
Week 3: Ready to apply, Sarah finds much of her application pre-filled with the information she’s already provided. She uploads her documents and can track every step of the process until acceptance and admission.
Throughout: The system sends friendly reminders about deadlines and missing documents, keeping her on track without feeling pressured. By the time she arrives on campus, she will have experienced a streamlined, personalized admissions process that sets a positive tone for her educational journey.
This is what a good student portal aims to achieve. With tools like a Student Information System (SIS), a Virtual Admission Assistant (VAA), and a Quote Builder integrated into your school’s student portal, you can expect excellent results that’ll leave everyone satisfied. It will make a difference in the student’s journey, helping them make a seamless transition from inquiry to enrollment.
For the school involved, it’ll help reduce your workload and create enhanced tracking reporting results for better decision-making. This will ultimately increase student enrollment.
Example: A good SIS incorporates elements and records all aspects of a student’s journey, from recruitment to graduation. It is usually integrated into your student portal, as this example shows.
Source: HEM
A good portal doesn’t just make life easier for the schools that use it–it facilitates streamlined workflows for these schools, which is useful for helping them finetune and improve their admissions process. As a school looking to increase its prospects, it’ll help you know what’s working and what’s not so you can adjust as appropriate. With the right analytics tool, schools can easily track:
This data provides valuable insights that schools can process to produce better outcomes. It’s a wealth of actionable information that helps schools make better decisions about where to allocate resources and refine their processes. The ultimate goal is to serve prospective students better and help them achieve their enrollment goals first.
The benefits of a well-designed student portal extend far beyond the admissions process. Some of these benefits include:
A modern student portal can make a big difference in the student journey from inquiry to enrollment. It helps schools to:
As technology continues to evolve, student portals will only become more important. A robust student portal is no longer a luxury—it’s a necessity for institutions aiming to meet the demands of today’s tech-savvy learners. The schools that succeed will be those that embrace these changes while keeping the student experience at the heart of everything they do.
By adopting a student portal, these schools can enhance the student experience, improve administrative efficiency, and ultimately boost enrollment rates. From the first click to the first day on campus, the journey becomes seamless, personalized, and rewarding for both students and staff.
Try the HEM Student Portal!
Question: What is the purpose of a student portal?
Answer: A student portal is an online resource that guides students and helps them access helpful resources throughout the journey from exploring to application, enrollment and beyond.
Question: What is the student login system?
Answer: A student login system allows students to access everything from application progress to status, academic records, courses, schedules, and campus services through their institution’s online portal, using a username and password.
Question: What is the student journey?
Answer: The student journey begins with exploration and moves to application, admission, and enrollment. Beyond that, it involves academic learning, campus involvement, career preparation, and other experiences that shape their overall education and personal growth.
by CUPA-HR | February 12, 2025
Each month, CUPA-HR General Counsel Ira Shepard provides an overview of several labor and employment law cases and regulatory actions with implications for the higher ed workplace. Here’s the latest from Ira.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission collected nearly $700 million for workers in 2024, eclipsing the previous record of $660 million collected in 2023. The agency reported that almost $470 million was collected for private sector, state and local workers through mediation, conciliation and administrative settlements. Nearly $200 million was collected through mediation, conciliation and administrative settlements for federal workers. An additional $40 million was collected for employees through litigation.
Of the 111 lawsuits filed by the agency in fiscal year 2024, 40% involved claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act and 6% involved claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. Most of the remainder involved Title VII claims of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin discrimination. More than a dozen of these lawsuits involved systemic allegations raised for multiple employees.
The Trump administration discharged, in unprecedented fashion, sitting members of the National Labor Relations Board and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, leaving both agencies without a quorum to do business. The Supreme Court has ruled that the NLRB cannot issue decisions without a quorum. This means that the NLRB cannot decide unfair labor practice cases or decide appeals of union election cases until it regains three members confirmed by the Senate. In addition, the Trump administration terminated the sitting independent NLRB general counsel who makes decisions on what cases to prosecute before the board.
Without a quorum, the EEOC cannot issue new regulations or guidance, nor revoke or edit existing ones. In addition, without a quorum, the EEOC cannot vote to initiate new class action cases and is limited in taking on new enforcement litigation.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (covering Connecticut, New York and Vermont) reversed a trial judge’s decision dismissing a challenge to a fellowship program at Pfizer. To address challenges in recruitment, retention and promotion of diverse employees, Pfizer created and reserved its fellowship program for Black/African American, Latino/Hispanic, and Native American students. The plaintiffs contended that the fellowship program unlawfully discriminated against non-minority individuals (Do No Harm v. Pfizer Inc. (2nd Cir. No. 23-15, Opinion 1/10/25)). The three-judge panel remanded the case back to the trial judge to review whether the dismissal was proper.
This case is another example of increased scrutiny of DEI programs in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision on Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which curtailed the use of race in college admissions. Bloomberg reported that the parties reached an agreement to settle the case. The full settlement is not available but it appears the fellowship program will end with the induction of the current year’s recipients.
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently trimmed the scope of permissible remedial orders granted by the NLRB to employees who win unfair labor practice cases. The appeals court drew a distinction between traditional make-whole remedies for employees who are fired as a result of an unfair labor practice and traditional back pay and reinstatement. The latter continues to be permissible, but the NLRB’s authority to order “consequential” damages for reimbursement for late credit card fees, medical expenses and the like are not permissible (NLRB v. Starbucks (3rd Cir. No. 23-1953, 12/27/24)).
As a practical matter, absent a decision on this issue by the Supreme Court, the NLRB will continue to assert its authority to render consequential damage awards, but the awards will not be enforceable in the states covered by the 3rd Circuit, which includes Delaware, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.
Bloomberg reports that a number of challenges to DEI training — on the grounds that they create a hostile work environment for White employees — are surviving the summary judgment stage of initial litigation. Nonetheless, commentators conclude that most of that litigation will ultimately fail to clear the hurdle that requires the action to be “pervasive” in order to prove a hostile work environment case. Commentators also point out that the anti-DEI movement is likely to grow during the new Trump administration.
In addition to hostile work environment cases, public employees have challenged public employers under the First Amendment for forcing the employee to listen to and affirm DEI concepts. However, employers that support DEI training have successfully used the First Amendment to challenge a Florida law restricting the use of certain workplace DEI training concepts (Honeyfund.com Inc. v. Florida (11th Cir. No. 22-13135, 3/4/24)).
The Alabama chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, the NAACP, and a group of Alabama professors have filed suit in federal court, alleging that the new Alabama state law barring public funding of DEI programs violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution (Simon v. Ivey (N.D. Ala. No. 2:25-cv-00057, complaint 1/14/25)). The complaint alleges that the Alabama law restricts the funding of teaching “academic viewpoints” deemed to be “divisive” and prohibits funding of student groups espousing such views in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
The complaint further alleges that such viewpoint bans disproportionately affect Black students and Black faculty members. The complaint also alleges that the Alabama law violates minority students’ and professors’ right to equal protection from intentional discrimination and freedom of association under the First Amendment. The complaint further argues that the Alabama law should be struck down as “void for vagueness” under the applicable constitutional standard.
The U.S. Supreme Court rejected a heightened standard of proof needed to show that employees are exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act overtime requirements (E.M.D. Sales v. Carrera (U.S. No. 23-217 Opinion 1/15/25)). This will make it somewhat easier for employers to show that employees are not entitled to overtime pay. The Supreme Court held in a unanimous decision written by Justice Kavanaugh that employers are subject to the regular “preponderance of the evidence” rule in proving that an employee is not subject to the applicable overtime rules rather than the higher “clear and convincing” standard.
Justice Kavanaugh concluded on behalf of a unanimous court that, where a law is silent on the applicable standard of proof, as the FLSA is, the regular preponderance of the evidence rule applies. Under this standard, an employer must show that it is more likely than not that the employee is exempt from the overtime requirements.
Cengage authors dedicate themselves to producing high-quality content, while also prioritizing a functional learning experience for students, equipping them with background information and tools necessary to analyze the important topics covered in their courses. We’re happy to introduce you to the authors of two first edition titles, and one upcoming fifth edition title, within the Major Problems Anthology series, which familiarizes students with important topics in U.S history, world history and western civilization.
Ready to meet these authors and learn about their titles? We can’t wait for you to get to know them all.
“Major Problems in Western Civilization,” 1e includes a variety of supporting materials and historical prose, guiding a carefully curated set of primary and secondary source selections. This text preps instructors and students so they can engage primary sources at the highest level.
Jackson J. Spielvogel is Associate Professor Emeritus of History at The Pennsylvania State University. He received his Ph.D. from The Ohio State University, where he specialized in Reformation history. His work has been supported by fellowships from the Fulbright Foundation and the Foundation for Reformation Research. He is the author of “Western Civilization,” now in its 12th edition, as well as co-author (with William Duiker) of “World History,” now in its 10th edition. Professor Spielvogel has won five major university-wide teaching awards.
Kathryn Spielvogel earned a B.A. in history, and M.A. in art history from The Pennsylvania State University. She continued her graduate studies in history at the University at Buffalo, SUNY, before working as a research editor on history textbooks for the past fifteen years. Passionate about historic preservation and economic development, Kathryn volunteers for several non-profit organizations while renovating historic homes and commercial buildings throughout Pennsylvania.
“Major Problems in World History,” 1e is a comprehensive source for documents and secondary essays dealing with a broad sweep of world history. Each chapter begins with a short introductory essay providing historical context for that period of history.
William J. Duiker is Liberal Arts Professor Emeritus of East Asian studies at The Pennsylvania State University. He earned a Ph.D. in East Asian history at Georgetown University in 1968. A former foreign service officer with assignments in Taiwan and South Vietnam, he is the author of several books on East Asia. He is also co-author with colleague Jackson Spielvogel of “World History,” 10e. He has traveled widely and was awarded a Faculty Scholar Medal for Outstanding Achievement in 1996.
“Major Problems in American History” includes both primary sources and analytical essays on important U.S history topics, with an overall goal towards helping students refine their critical thinking skills.
Elizabeth Cobbs is a Professor and Dwight E. Stanford Chair in American Foreign Relations at San Diego State University and has won literary prizes for both history and fiction, including the Allan Nevins Prize and Stuart Bernath Book Prize. She earned her Ph.D. in American history at Stanford University. She has served on the jury for the Pulitzer Prize in History and on the Historical Advisory Committee of the U.S. State Department. She has received awards and fellowships from the Fulbright Commission and other distinguished institutions. Her essays have been published in the New York Times, Jerusalem Post and Los Angeles Times, among others. Her current project is a history of women soldiers in World War I.
Edward J. Blum is a Professor of History at San Diego State University. He received his B.A. from the University of Michigan and his M.A. and Ph.D. from the University of Kentucky. He is the author and co-author of several books on United States history and the winner of numerous awards, including the Peter Seaborg Award for Civil War Scholarship and the Gustave O. Arlt Award in the Humanities.
Vanessa Walker is the Gordon Levin Associate Professor of Diplomatic History at Amherst College, where she teaches classes on U.S. politics, foreign relations and human rights. She received her B.A. from Whitman College and her M.A. and Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She is the recipient of fellowships from the Miller Center for Public Affairs at the University of Virginia, the George Mosse Program at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Stanton Foundation Applied History Program.
