On Aug. 22 the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights found that George Mason University violated Title VI and required President Gregory Washington to issue a personal apology, retract statements supporting diversity, and cease equity-focused hiring practices. Title VI aims to prevent discrimination, not penalize recognition of diversity, and courts have allowed diversity consideration in holistic decisions. The OCR action represents a political shift from longstanding interpretations and contradicts recent judicial rulings protecting DEI programs. The demand for a personal apology from the university's first Black president carries symbolic weight and echoes historical targeting of minority leaders.
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.
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.
Collection
[
|
...
]