Tag: George

  • George Mason faculty urge leaders to reject Trump deals risking ‘institutional autonomy’

    George Mason faculty urge leaders to reject Trump deals risking ‘institutional autonomy’

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Dive Brief:

    • George Mason University’s faculty senate on Wednesday urged the public Virginia institution’s leadership to rebuke any deal with the Trump administration that would undermine its independence.
    • In a newly passed resolution, the senate said recent federal deals struck by other colleges have set a precedent in which “administrative convenience takes precedence over the faculty’s constitutional and professional responsibility.” The resolution urged George Mason’s board and president to reject any similar settlement with the Trump administration to end federal investigations into the university. 
    • George Mason leaders must also decline the administration’s separate higher education compact, it said, as that proposal seeks to “blur the constitutional distinction between voluntary funding conditions and compelled oversight.”

    Dive Insight:

    Under President Donald Trump, the departments of Education and Justice have opened at least four investigations into George Mason since this summer, targeting the university’s diversity, equity and inclusion work.

    George Mason’s faculty senate warned the governing board Wednesday against cutting a deal with the DOJ that puts the university under “continuing federal supervision.” And any settlement must involve “transparent deliberation and meaningful faculty consultation,” as required by George Mason’s shared governance policies, the senate said.

    Faculty cited the University of Virginia’s recent deal with the federal government as one that did not meet these standards. 

    The state flagship in October agreed, in part, to adhere to the DOJ’s guidance against DEI efforts and to make quarterly oversight reports for three years. In exchange, the federal government suspended and will eventually end five DOJ investigations into UVA and continued to give the university access to research funding.

    The resolution from George Mason’s faculty senate said UVA had “negotiated in secrecy, without faculty consultation” and imposed “years of federal monitoring and mandatory reporting that chill free inquiry, constrain legitimate academic debate, and erode shared governance.”

    Just six weeks after the Education Department announced a probe into George Mason, it formally accused the university of illegally using race and other protected characteristics when making hiring and promotion decisions. As in other federal investigations into George Mason, the department singled out the university’s president, Gregory Washington, who has been an ardent supporter of diversity initiatives during his five-year tenure.

    The agency gave the university 10 days to meet a list of demands to resolve the investigation. Among other requirements, one condition would have compelled Washington to publicly apologize. The president instead firmly rebuked the Education Department’s findings, with his lawyer calling them “a legal fiction.”

    In contrast, George Mason’s governing board said that it would seek to negotiate with the Trump administration to resolve the allegations. The board also said Washington’s attorney would be involved in talks with the Education Department.

    The faculty senate resolution pushed George Mason’s leaders to not accept Trump’s proposed higher education compact or any agreement that “conditions federal funding on the surrender of institutional autonomy or faculty governance.”

    Through the compact, the Trump administration seeks to have colleges voluntarily agree with its policy agenda in exchange for research funding incentives rather than its playbook of seeking compliance through unprecedented punitive actions.

    But the faculty senate argued in their resolution that the compact’s “promise of ‘excellence’ masks a fundamental shift of authority from university faculty and governing boards to federal agencies.”

    Further complicating matters, George Mason’s board currently has just six voting members — down from the usual 16 — meaning it doesn’t have a quorum. Since June, the governing bodies of George Mason and two other Virginia public colleges have been in a state of political flux due to a fight between a Democrat-controlled state Senate committee and Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin over his university board selections.

    The committee rejected many of Youngkin’s selections, and despite his efforts to install them anyway, court decisions have blocked them from serving.

    The faculty senate on Wednesday said that the board should not negotiate or sign off on any substantial agreement “affecting curriculum development, research priorities, faculty governance, or the allocation of university resources” without members who are “properly appointed and duly confirmed” by the Virginia General Assembly.

    Virginia’s governor-elect, Democrat Abigail Spanberger, last month raised similar concerns over potential actions taken by UVA’s board, which has 12 of its intended 17 members. 

    George Mason’s board — and the board’s leader — have come under scrutiny from faculty and lawmakers.

    In July, the George Mason chapter of the American Association of University Professors voted no-confidence in the board and urged it to defend Washington.

    And the leaders of Virginia’s state senate accused Charles Stimson, head of George Mason’s board, of a conflict of interest in September and called for him to resign if he did not recuse himself from discussions related to the federal investigations. 

    Stimson is a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank the AAUP found to be among those behind the wave of state-level anti-DEI legislation. The foundation also created Project 2025, a wide-ranging conservative blueprint for Trump’s second term whose policies the president has embraced after distancing himself from the handbook as a candidate.

    Stimson, whose term runs through June 2027, rejected calls to either recuse himself or step down.

    Source link

  • George Mason demands pro-Palestinian student group remove video from social media, but public universities can’t do that

    George Mason demands pro-Palestinian student group remove video from social media, but public universities can’t do that

    Late last month, the student chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine at George Mason University posted a video on a social media account that criticized U.S. foreign policy and Israel. The video (now removed), which apparently stylistically mimicked a Hamas video, included phrases such as “genocidal Zionist State,” “the belly of the beast,” and “from the river to the sea.” It also specifically addressed conditions in Gaza and GMU’s alleged oppression of pro-Palestinian protestors. 

    Regardless of one’s views on Israel and Gaza, all of this is protected speech. But rather than protecting student political discourse, GMU demanded the SJP chapter take down the video explicitly because its language ran afoul of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s vague definition of antisemitism, which has been incorporated into GMU’s anti-discrimination policy. The school warned that failure to comply could result in disciplinary action.  

    Student groups at public universities have the First Amendment right to post videos expressing their views on international conflicts, even if some members of the campus community are offended by the viewpoints expressed. We’ve seen no evidence the video constituted incitement, true threats, intimidation, or student-on-student harassment — narrow categories of speech unprotected by the First Amendment.

    When campus administrators invoke the IHRA definition and its examples to investigate, discipline, or silence political expression, the distinction between conduct and speech becomes meaningless.

    This is not the first — nor will it be the last — instance of universities relying on vague, overbroad anti-harassment definitions to censor speech some members of the campus community find offensive. In fact, overbroad anti-harassment policies remain the most common form of speech codes on college campuses. But it does point to the clear and growing threat the use of the IHRA definition poses to campus discourse about the Israel-Palestine conflict. It’s a danger about which FIRE has warned of since 2016, a danger we’ve seen in application, and one that the IHRA definition’s supporters routinely brush aside. As more and more states adopt IHRA for the purpose of enforcing anti-discrimination law, we’re likely to see increasingly more instances of campus censorship in the future.

    IHRA defines antisemitism as:

    a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.

    The document also provides a list of examples of antisemitism that include, among others:

    • Applying double standards by requiring of [Israel] a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
    • Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

    Language that does this (and that does not also fall into a specific category of unprotected speech) may offend some or many people. It nevertheless constitutes core political speech. Supporters of the use of the IHRA definition on campus insist that the definition does not restrict free speech, but rather helps identify antisemitic intent or motive when determining whether a student has created a hostile environment in violation of anti-discrimination laws. But this attempted distinction collapses in practice. 

    When “intent” is inferred from political expression — as it has at GMU and other campuses across the country — speech itself becomes evidence of a violation. Under this framework, students and faculty learn that certain viewpoints about Israel are per se suspect, and both institutional censorship and self-censorship follow. Despite its defenders’ claims, when campus administrators invoke the IHRA definition and its examples to investigate, discipline, or silence political expression, the distinction between conduct and speech becomes meaningless.

    Analysis: Harvard’s settlement adopting IHRA anti-Semitism definition a prescription to chill campus speech

    Harvard agreed to settle two lawsuits brought against it by Jewish students that alleged the university ignored “severe and pervasive antisemitism on campus.”


    Read More

    The problem is compounded by the Trump administration’s Title VI enforcement. Its unlawful defund-first, negotiate-second approach places universities’ federal funding — sometimes hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars — at the mercy of the administration’s Joint Antisemitism Task Force. That threat alone is enough to force campus administrators to make a choice: censor student speech critical of Israel, or risk losing access to federal funding. All too often, as we have seen repeatedly, institutions choose access to money over standing up for student rights.

    Instead of relying on IHRA’s vague definition for anti-discrimination purposes, FIRE has long supported efforts to constitutionally and effectively address antisemitic discrimination on college campuses by passing legislation to: 

    • Prohibit harassment based on religion.
    • Confirm that Title VI prohibits discrimination based on ethnic stereotypes.
    • Codify the Supreme Court’s definition of discriminatory harassment. 

    These options would better address antisemitic harassment and would do so without suppressing free speech.

    Source link

  • George Williams urges VCs to ‘aim higher’ – Campus Review

    George Williams urges VCs to ‘aim higher’ – Campus Review

    Universities are ‘friendless and alone’, Western Sydney University vice-chancellor George Williams explained in his new essay, that warns of the dangers of fading social license.

    Please login below to view content or subscribe now.

    Membership Login

    Source link

  • George Mason University’s board looks to negotiate with Trump administration

    George Mason University’s board looks to negotiate with Trump administration

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Dive Brief:

    • George Mason University’s governing board said late last week that it wants to negotiate with the Trump administration to resolve allegations that it violated civil rights law. 
    • In late August, the U.S. Department of Education alleged that George Mason has illegally used race and other protected characteristics in hiring and promotions, a conclusion reached just six weeks after the agency announced a probe into the university. 
    • An attorney for university President Gregory Washington, who is at the center of the probe, has repudiated the agency’s allegations, describing them as “a legal fiction.” Washington’s attorney will also be involved in talks with the Education Department, according to the board’s statement.

    Dive Insight:

    Over a period of weeks this summer, the Trump administration ramped up pressure on George Mason. The departments of Education and Justice opened at least four probes between them into the university, often citing comment from Washington in support of diversity initiatives.

    Washington’s attorney, Douglas Gansler, took the Education Department to task for how quickly it determined George Mason violated the law.

    “It is glaringly apparent that the OCR investigation process has been cut short, and ‘findings’ have been made in spite of a very incomplete fact-finding process, including only two interviews with university academic deans,” Gansler wrote.

    The attorney also described some of the evidence cited by the Education Department as “gross mischaracterizations of statements made by Dr. Washington” that didn’t lead to policy changes. 

    For example, when the Education Department concluded that George Mason violated civil rights law, it linked to a statement Washington made in 2021 in support of having faculty reflect the diversity of the student body and broader community. The department took the statement as expressing “support for racial preferencing” in hiring. 

    But, as Gansler highlighted, Washington specifically said in the statement that the diversity principles he was promoting were “not code for establishing a quota system.”

    Gansler also warned the university’s board against requiring Washington to apologize, which was among the demands made by the Education Department. The lawyer pointed out that such an apology could open the university up to liability.

    Through all of this, George Mason’s board of visitors — headed by Charles Stimson, who holds leadership positions at The Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank — has been relatively quiet. 

    To represent it in dealings with the Trump administration, the board hired Torridon Law, which was co-founded by William Barr, formerly U.S. attorney general during the first Trump administration. The firm also has several prominent Republican lawyers on staff. 

    In July, the university’s chapter of the American Association of University Professors voted no confidence in the board and called its response to the Trump administration’s actions to that point “inadequate and deeply troubling.”

    And yet, in August — at a meeting that the AAUP chapter warned could set the stage for Washington’s ouster — George Mason’s board voted to give the leader a raise. 

    Since then, Democrat members of a Virginia Senate committee have blocked six appointees to George Mason’s board picked by the state’s Republican governor, Glenn Youngkin. The move has left the board of visitors without a quorum for conducting official business. 

    In announcing plans to negotiate with the Education Department, the board said Friday that it “remains committed to ensuring that George Mason complies with all federal civil rights law and remains hopeful that a favorable resolution can be reached.”

    George Mason is just the latest in an expanding set of colleges targeted by the Trump administration over allegations related to racial preferencing, campus antisemitism and policies supporting transgender student athletes. 

    Some universities, including Columbia and Brown, have paid hefty sums to settle allegations and have at least some of their federal research funding restored. The administration is also seeking some $500 million from Harvard University and $1 billion from the University of California, Los Angeles.

    Source link

  • George Mason University leader rebukes Trump administration’s apology demand

    George Mason University leader rebukes Trump administration’s apology demand

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    George Mason University President Gregory Washington’s lawyer on Monday firmly repudiated the Trump administration’s allegations that the public Virginia institution had violated civil rights law.

    Last week, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights alleged that George Mason’s hiring and promotion practices violated Title VI, which bans federally funded institutions from discriminating based on race, color or national origin. An agency official singled out Washington as the leader of a “university-wide campaign to implement unlawful DEI policies that intentionally discriminate on the basis of race,” and the department demanded that he apologize.

    In an 11-page letter to the college’s governing board sent on Washington’s behalf, his attorney Douglas Gansler called OCR’s allegations “a legal fiction,” and stressed that George Mason’s leadership has kept the university in compliance with federal law. “Far from needing to apologize, you all have a shared record to be proud of,” he wrote.

    Since July, the Trump administration has opened at least four investigations into George Mason, targeting the large research institution over universitywide diversity initiatives, of which Washington has been a champion.

    The Education Department’s findings came just six weeks after the agency opened the investigation, citing a complaint from “multiple professors at GMU” alleging that the university’s leaders had approved policies illegally giving certain underrepresented groups preferential treatment since 2020.

    Gansler called out the brief length of the agency’s investigation and said OCR’s letter shows that federal officials “have not spent sufficient time finding critical and materials facts.”

    “It is glaringly apparent that the OCR investigation process has been cut short, and ‘findings’ have been made in spite of a very incomplete fact-finding process, including only two interviews with university academic deans,” Gansler wrote.

    Since January, George Mason has renamed its diversity, equity and inclusion center and cut or restructured DEI-related positions to comply with federal directives, he also noted.

    The Education Department’s announcement last week focused much of its ire on Washington, alleging the university president’s prior statements were proof of “support for racial preferencing.”

    But some of the department’s evidence was out-of-context or “gross mischaracterizations of statements made by Dr. Washington” that didn’t lead to policy changes, Gansler wrote. And one contested policy would have predated Washington’s tenure, he argued.

    In one example, the Education Department quoted a 2021 statement from Washington on adopting an inclusive hiring framework.

    “If you have two candidates who are both ‘above the bar’ in terms of requirements for a position, but one adds to your diversity and the other does not, then why couldn’t that candidate be better, even if that candidate may not have better credentials than the other candidate?” Washington said at the time.

    Gansler said the quote was pulled out of context and never resulted in a policy being enacted.

    “His question was just that: a question, offered to provoke dialogue within the university community, as should be expected of a faculty member and academic leader of a university,” the attorney wrote. “The question does not suggest hiring minority candidates of lesser credentials, but rather considering how two equally qualified candidates may contribute differently to the campus.”

    He added that Washington is not directly involved in evaluating candidates for faculty positions and that OCR would be unable to cite “any discriminatory hiring decision made based on it.”

    It is glaringly apparent that the OCR investigation process has been cut short, and “findings” have been made in spite of a very incomplete fact-finding process.

    Douglas Gansler

    Attorney for George Mason University President Gregory Washington

    The Education Department gave George Mason 10 days to voluntarily agree to a proposal it said would resolve the alleged violations. Part of that proposal would require Washington to publicly apologize to the university community “for promoting unlawful discriminatory practices in hiring, promotion, and tenure processes.”

    In response, Gansler advised George Mason’s trustees against agreeing to the Education Department’s demand for an apology.

    Source link

  • George Mason Must Not Comply With the Government’s Demands (opinion)

    George Mason Must Not Comply With the Government’s Demands (opinion)

    The Department of Education is demanding a personal apology from George Mason president Gregory Washington.

    Bill O’Leary/The Washington Post via Getty Images

    On Aug. 22, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights announced that George Mason University, led by President Gregory Washington, violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The agency demanded an extraordinary remedy—President Washington must issue a personal apology, to be posted “prominently on the University website,” retract statements supporting diversity and abandon practices that even hint at equity-focused hiring. The message to George Mason, where I was a professor of public policy for nearly two decades, is clear: Equity is now presented as a civil rights violation.

    Title VI was meant to prevent discrimination, not to penalize institutions for recognizing that diversity matters. With courts allowing the consideration of diversity as one factor among many in holistic decisions, OCR’s stance appears to be a politically motivated shift away from long-standing interpretations—not a clear enforcement of the law. Just last week, a federal judge “struck down two Trump administration actions aimed at eliminating diversity, equity and inclusion programs at the nation’s schools and universities,” the Associated Press reported.

    Most alarming in OCR’s proposed resolutions is the demand for a personal apology from the university’s first Black president. Washington, who called for eliminating racist legacies on campus, is now being compelled to apologize for doing just that. This isn’t simply an institutional issue—it’s a deeply symbolic act that resembles public shaming of a leader of color for advocating inclusion. It evokes the disturbing history of targeting minority leaders through law and policy.

    This move against Mason is not an isolated incident; it is part of a broader effort to reshape public institutions. Consider the Trump administration’s recent attacks on the Smithsonian Institution. The president criticized the Smithsonian for highlighting slavery’s brutality and diversity in its exhibits, calling the museums “out of control” and “too woke.” He ordered a comprehensive review of Smithsonian content to align it with his vision of “American exceptionalism,” demanding changes to exhibits begin within 120 days.

    Here again, ideology replaces impartial curation. A common thread emerges: Whether in higher education or national museums, diversity and sincere historical reflection are viewed not as civic strengths but as transgressions. Institutional autonomy and academic governance are being subordinated to partisan narratives.

    Should we dismiss the department’s findings as another part of the culture wars? I worry the consequences are much more serious. If OCR’s interpretation of Title VI holds, even referring to diversity as a priority could trigger federal enforcement. Schools are feel compelled to eliminate inclusive programs, silence voices advocating for equity and adhere to a limited historical perspective—all out of fear of losing funding.

    That chilling effect would cripple higher education when it needs vibrancy most. Universities must remain havens of reasoned inquiry, honest history and inclusive excellence. When federal agencies start dictating not only policy but the exact language leaders must use, we enter coercive territory.

    GMU’s faculty, students, alums and board members must unite in opposition to OCR’s unjustified demands. The proposed resolution is not genuine compliance; it’s forced capitulation driven by intimidation. Institutions should not be compelled to apologize for standing up for the principles of true equal opportunity.

    This moment is a clarion call for universities. Yesterday, it was the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard, dragged through headline-grabbing investigations. It was New College of Florida, where political appointees dismantled DEI programs and faculty governance. It was the University of Virginia, accused by the Department of Justice of defying federal antidiscrimination laws. Today it is Mason. Tomorrow, it could be UCLA, Michigan, Wisconsin or any other institution that values diversity, equity and academic freedom. No campus—public or private, flagship or regional—should assume it is immune.

    George Mason should reject the department’s findings and oppose this injustice. Capitulation is not compliance; it’s surrender. If Mason yields, it will damage its credibility and encourage more attacks on higher education nationwide. When universities submit to politically motivated demands disguised as enforcement, they legitimize them and invite more. Silence will be perceived as complicity. Resistance is crucial to protecting the fundamental principles of higher education: autonomy, fairness and the freedom to teach and learn without political interference.

    This is not the first time universities have faced pressure to abandon their commitments to equity and truth. In the 1960s, Southern universities used “law and order” to oppose desegregation. In the 1980s and 1990s, Black faculty and administrators pushing for fair representation often faced vilification and political retaliation. Today, the same tactics are being used, only now they are masked in the language of “civil rights enforcement.”

    What is happening at Mason is part of that history. Title VI, a law born of the civil rights movement to expand opportunity, is being distorted into a tool to silence leaders of color and dismantle diversity initiatives. President Washington’s commitment to pursuing equity should be celebrated, not criminalized. Twisting Title VI into an instrument of ideological punishment and racial scapegoating should alarm everyone who values a democracy that depends on honest history, inclusive leadership and academic freedom.

    And let’s be honest: Coercing a university president to issue a scripted public apology isn’t enforcement—it’s extortion. It’s the same tactic organized crime always uses: Demand submission, humiliate and make an example of one victim to scare others. That has no place in a democracy, much less in higher education.

    The struggle now is the same as it was then: whether our universities will stay places of truth, inclusion and independent thought, or whether they will become tools of partisan control. Mason must choose the first. And the rest of us—in Virginia and across the country—must support it.

    James Finkelstein is professor emeritus of Public Policy at George Mason University

    Source link

  • George Mason University violated civil rights law, Education Department alleges

    George Mason University violated civil rights law, Education Department alleges

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Dive Brief: 

    • The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights alleged Friday that Virginia’s George Mason University has violated civil rights law by illegally using race and other protected characteristics in its hiring and promotion practices. 
    • Craig Trainor, the office’s acting assistant secretary for civil rights, accused George Mason President Gregory Washington of waging a “university-wide campaign to implement unlawful DEI policies that intentionally discriminate on the basis of race.”
    • Under the Trump administration, Trainor and other officials have set their sights on diversity, equity and inclusion programs and other policies that were designed to help historically disadvantaged groups. 

    Dive Insight: 

    George Mason has faced a torrent of investigations in recent weeks from the Trump administration, including probes into whether the university is practicing discriminatory hiring and admissions and adequately responding to antisemitism on campus. 

    The most recent allegations from the Education Department, announced just six weeks after it opened the probe, said the agency determined that the university violated Title VI. The civil rights law bars federally funded institutions from discriminating based on race, color or national origin. 

    The agency gave George Mason, which is located near Washington, D.C., 10 days to agree with the Trump administration’s proposal to voluntarily resolve the alleged violations. 

    Under the proposed agreement, Washington would have to release a statement saying the university’s hiring and promotion practices will comply with Title VI and explaining the steps for submitting a discrimination complaint. 

    The university would also have to review its employment policies, conduct annual training for all employees involved in hiring and promotion decisions, and maintain and share records with the federal government upon request to prove compliance. 

    The agreement would also require Washington to apologize to the university community “for promoting unlawful discriminatory practices in hiring, promotion, and tenure processes,” the Education Department said. 

    In a Friday statement, George Mason’s governing board said the Education Department notified it of the violation, and it will review the proposed resolution and fully respond to government inquiries.

    “Our sole focus is our fiduciary duty to serve the best interests of the University and the people of the Commonwealth of Virginia,” the board said. 

    The Education Department said it opened the investigation following a complaint from multiple George Mason professors who alleged that university leadership has implemented policies that give preferential treatment to underrepresented groups since 2020. 

    The agency pointed to a 2021 statement from Washington as evidence of “support for racial preferencing.”

    In it, Washington said that leaders wanted staff and faculty to reflect the diversity of the student population. “This is not code for establishing a quota system,” he added. “It is a recognition of the reality that our society’s future lies in multicultural inclusion.” 

    He noted that a majority of George Mason’s students weren’t White, yet only 30% of the university’s faculty were part of a ethnic minority group, were multi-ethnic or came from international communities. To achieve the university’s vision, officials should focus on both professional credentials and lived experiences when recruiting employees, he said. 

    “If you have two candidates who are both ‘above the bar’ in terms of requirements for a position, but one adds to your diversity and the other does not, then why couldn’t that candidate be better, even if that candidate may not have better credentials than the other candidate?” Washington said at the time. 

    On Friday, the Education Department also cited several George Mason policies it said violated Title VI, including one it said appeared on the university’s website in 2024. The policy said officials could forgo a competitive search process for faculty members when “there is an opportunity to hire a candidate who strategically advances the institutional commitment to diversity and inclusion,” the agency said.

    Washington, George Mason’s first Black president, pushed back on the Education Department’s allegations when it first opened the investigation. In a July 16 statement, he said that the university’s promotion and tenure policies don’t give preferential treatment based on race or other protected characteristics. 

    He also pointed to a “profound shift in how Title VI is being applied.” 

    “Longstanding efforts to address inequality — such as mentoring programs, inclusive hiring practices, and support for historically underrepresented groups — are in many cases being reinterpreted as presumptively unlawful,” he said. 

    The U.S. Department of Justice has also opened several investigations into George Mason, including one over its hiring and promotion practices. 

    Another DOJ probe is looking into the university’s Faculty Senate after its members approved a resolution supporting Washington and the diversity initiatives following the federal investigations, according to The New York Times. The agency has demanded internal communications from the Faculty Senate as part of its investigation.

    Todd Wolfson, president of the American Association of University Professors slammed the probe shortly after it was announced. 

    “Let’s call this what it is: a gross misuse of federal power to chill speech, silence faculty members, and undermine shared governance,” he said in a July statement. “It is an attack on academic freedom, plain and simple.”

    Source link

  • Ed Dept. Says George Mason Violated Civil Rights Law

    Ed Dept. Says George Mason Violated Civil Rights Law

    The Virginia university has been under investigation since early July.

    John M. Chase/iStock Unreleased/Getty Images

    Gregory Washington, president of Virginia’s George Mason University, must apologize to the university community for “promoting unlawful discriminatory practices” in order to resolve allegations that the institution violated civil rights law, the Department of Education announced Friday.

    The department claims that the university has illegally factored race and “other immutable characteristics” into hiring, promotion and tenure practices since at least 2020.

    Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Craig Trainor said the unlawful practices began shortly after the murder of George Floyd, when Washington called on faculty and administrators to expunge campus of “racist vestiges” by “intentionally discriminat[ing] on the basis of race.” 

    “You can’t make this up,” Trainor said in the statement. “Despite this unfortunate chapter in Mason’s history, the university now has the opportunity to come into compliance with federal civil rights laws by entering into a Resolution Agreement with the Office for Civil Rights.”

    The Education Department first announced in early July that it would investigate GMU for potentially violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which bars discrimination based on race and national origin. Later that month, the Department of Justice announced it would investigate the institution’s Faculty Senate after the panel passed a resolution in support of Washington, who had been quick to push back on the Trump administration and defend the university’s commitment to addressing social injustice. Many conservatives called for Washington—the institution’s first Black president—to be fired. But the university’s Board of Visitors spared him at a meeting Aug. 1, at least for now, and gave him a raise.

    Trainor said in the statement that “the Trump-McMahon Department of Education will not allow racially exclusionary practices—which violate the Civil Rights Act, the Equal Protection Clause, and Supreme Court precedent—to continue corrupting our nation’s educational institutions.”

    In addition to an apology, the Education Department is demanding that GMU post that statement “prominently” to the university’s website, remove any contrary statements from the past and revise campus policies to prevent future race-based programming. It also wants the institution to begin an annual training session for all individuals involved in recruitment, hiring, promotion or tenure decisions to emphasize the ban on racial consideration and provide records documenting compliance whenever they are requested moving forward.

    George Mason officials have 10 days to respond to the department’s proposed resolution agreement.

    Source link

  • Federal Agency Finds George Mason University Violated Civil Rights Law Through DEI Policies

    Federal Agency Finds George Mason University Violated Civil Rights Law Through DEI Policies

    The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights has determined that George Mason University violated federal civil rights law by using race as a factor in hiring and promotion decisions, the agency announced on Friday.

    The finding concluded that GMU violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color, and national origin in federally funded education programs. The university now has 10 days to accept a proposed resolution agreement or risk losing federal funding.

    Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Craig Trainor said President Gregory Washington led “a university-wide campaign to implement unlawful DEI policies that intentionally discriminate on the basis of race.”

    “You can’t make this up,” Trainor said in a statement, noting that Washington had previously called for removing “racist vestiges” from campus in 2020.

    The investigation, launched in July 2025, stemmed from complaints filed by multiple GMU professors who alleged the university adopted preferential treatment policies for faculty from “underrepresented groups” between 2020 and the present.

    Federal investigators said that they found several problematic practices. As recently as fall 2024, they argue that the university’s website stated it “may choose to waive the competitive search process when there is an opportunity to hire a candidate who strategically advances the institutional commitment to diversity and inclusion.”

    The current Faculty Handbook also requires approval from the “Office of Access, Compliance, and Community” – previously called the “Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” until GMU renamed it in March 2025 – before extending job offers.

    One high-level administrator told investigators that Washington “created an atmosphere of surveillance” regarding hiring decisions related to diversity objectives.

    Under the proposed resolution agreement, Washington must personally issue a statement and apology to the university community, acknowledging the discriminatory practices. The university must also revise hiring policies, conduct annual training, and remove any provisions encouraging racial preferences.

    GMU must post the presidential statement prominently on its website and remove any contradictory materials. The university would also be required to maintain compliance records and designate a coordinator to work with federal officials.

    George Mason University, located in Fairfax, Virginia, enrolls approximately 39,000 students and receives federal funding that could be at risk if the violations are not resolved.

    George Mason officials said that they are reviewing the specific resolution steps proposed by the Department of Education. 

    “We will continue to respond fully and cooperatively to all inquiries from the Department of Education, the Department of Justice and the U.S. House of Representatives and evaluate the evidence that comes to light,” the university said in a statement. “Our sole focus is our fiduciary duty to serve the best interests of the University and the people of the Commonwealth of Virginia.”

    Source link

  • George Washington U Violated Federal Civil Rights Law

    George Washington U Violated Federal Civil Rights Law

    The Department of Justice said Tuesday that George Washington University was “deliberately indifferent” toward Jewish students and faculty who said they faced antisemitic harassment and had violated federal civil rights law that bars discrimination based on race and national origin.

    The four-page letter signals that George Washington could be the next university in the Trump administration’s crosshairs. The DOJ sent a similar letter to the University of California, Los Angeles, late last month, and then various federal agencies froze more than $500 million in federal grants at the university. Since then, the Trump administration has demanded $1 billion from the UC system to resolve the dispute—a move the state’s governor called “extortion.”

    GW was one of 10 universities that a federal task force to combat antisemitism had planned to visit and investigate. That list included UCLA and Harvard and Columbia Universities, which also have been targeted by the Trump administration. 

    Harmeet Dhillon, the assistant attorney general for the civil rights division, wrote in the letter that the department plans to enforce its findings unless the university agrees to a voluntary resolution agreement to address the agency’s concerns. She didn’t detail what such an agreement would entail or what enforcement might look like.

    The department’s allegations largely center on how the university responded—or didn’t—to a spring 2024 encampment established to protest the war in Gaza. The university ultimately called in D.C. police to clear the demonstration after it persisted for nearly two weeks.

    “The purpose of the agitators’ efforts was to frighten, intimidate, and deny Jewish, Israeli, and American-Israeli students free and unfettered access to GWU’s educational environment,” Dhillon wrote. “This is the definition of hostility and a ‘hostile environment.’”

    She also wrote that university officials “took no meaningful action” in the face of at least eight complaints alleging that demonstrators at the encampment were discriminating against students because they were Jewish or Israeli. 

    George Washington spokesperson Shannon McClendon said in a statement that university officials were reviewing the letter.

    “GW condemns antisemitism, which has absolutely no place on our campuses or in a civil and humane society,” McClendon said. “Moreover, our actions clearly demonstrate our commitment to addressing antisemitic actions and promoting an inclusive campus environment by upholding a safe, respectful, and accountable environment. We have taken appropriate action under university policy and the law to hold individuals or organizations accountable, including during the encampment, and we do not tolerate behavior that threatens our community or undermines meaningful dialogue.”

    Source link