See How Trump's Executive Order Could Gut Diversity in Higher Ed

On April 23, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order that sent shockwaves through higher education. The directive, aimed at overhauling the accreditation system, claims to champion student outcomes and academic quality. Yet its true aim appears far more insidious: dismantling diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives that have long served as lifelines for underrepresented students. By targeting accreditors who uphold DEI standards, the administration risks unraveling decades of progress toward equitable education, leaving colleges and universities scrambling to navigate a new, hostile landscape.

At its core, the order accuses accreditors of promoting 'unlawful discrimination' through DEI requirements, framing these efforts as ideological overreach. It demands a shift toward metrics like graduation rates and post-graduation earnings, while prohibiting standards that consider race, ethnicity, or gender. This move, cloaked in the language of fairness, ignores the systemic barriers that DEI policies were designed to address. For students of color, first-generation learners, and others historically excluded from higher education, the stakes could not be higher.

The order’s supporters argue it will refocus accreditation on measurable results, freeing institutions from what they call divisive mandates. But this perspective glosses over a critical truth: DEI initiatives are not about division but about leveling a playing field that has been uneven for centuries. By stripping away these protections, the administration threatens to deepen inequities, undermining the very students who need support most.

This is not just a policy shift; it’s a deliberate attack on the principles of inclusion that have made American higher education a beacon of opportunity. The consequences will ripple far beyond campus gates, affecting workplaces, communities, and the nation’s ability to thrive in a diverse, globalized world.

The executive order leans heavily on the idea that accreditation should prioritize 'high-quality, high-value' academic programs, measured by graduation rates and earnings. On the surface, this sounds reasonable. Who wouldn’t want colleges to produce successful graduates? But the reality is far messier. The national six-year graduation rate, pegged at 64% in 2020, reflects not just institutional quality but also systemic challenges like underfunded K-12 schools, financial insecurity, and inadequate support for nontraditional students. To pin accountability solely on colleges ignores these broader realities.

Moreover, the order’s emphasis on post-graduation earnings as a marker of value is deeply flawed. Research shows that fields like education and social work, often chosen by women and people of color, yield lower salaries despite their societal importance. By contrast, high-earning majors like finance or engineering are less accessible to students from underresourced backgrounds. Tying accreditation to earnings risks penalizing institutions that serve diverse populations, effectively punishing them for prioritizing access over profit.

The order also demands 'intellectual diversity' among faculty, a phrase that sounds noble but often serves as a dog whistle for dismantling efforts to address systemic bias. True academic freedom thrives in environments where all voices, especially those historically silenced, are amplified. DEI initiatives have been instrumental in recruiting and retaining diverse faculty, fostering richer scholarship and better preparing students for a pluralistic workforce. To cast these efforts as discriminatory is to misrepresent their purpose and impact.

DEI policies trace their roots to the civil rights era, when landmark legislation like the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title IX began dismantling barriers to education. These efforts expanded access for students of color, women, and other marginalized groups, boosting college attainment rates and diversifying campuses. Today, students of color make up 40% of bachelor’s degree recipients, a historic high. Yet this progress is fragile, and the Trump administration’s order threatens to reverse it.

Since 2023, 19 states have passed laws restricting DEI efforts, closing offices, cutting staff, and eliminating scholarships. The University of Texas System alone lost 24 DEI offices and over 300 positions. These bans have already chilled campus climates, with students reporting reduced sense of belonging and support. The executive order escalates this assault, empowering federal agencies to investigate and potentially defund accreditors like the American Bar Association and the Liaison Committee on Medical Education for upholding DEI standards. Such actions could disrupt professional education, limiting diversity in fields like law and medicine where representation is already lacking.

The order’s defenders claim it aligns with the 2023 Supreme Court ruling against affirmative action in admissions. But that decision, while narrow, did not outlaw DEI initiatives outright. By conflating the two, the administration oversteps, imposing a one-size-fits-all ideology that stifles institutional autonomy and academic freedom. Colleges should be free to pursue missions that reflect their values, not forced to conform to a federal mandate that prioritizes metrics over people.

The human toll of this policy cannot be overstated. DEI programs provide scholarships, mentorship, and support services that help underrepresented students navigate higher education’s often alienating terrain. Without them, retention and graduation rates for these students could plummet, exacerbating existing disparities. Research shows that inclusive campus environments improve academic outcomes and mental health, particularly for students of color and first-generation learners. Stripping away these resources risks leaving students adrift, with ripple effects on their families and communities.

Beyond campuses, the order undermines the nation’s economic and social fabric. By 2031, 71% of 'good jobs' will require some postsecondary education, and diverse graduates are essential to meeting workforce demands. Companies increasingly value employees trained in inclusive environments, as diversity drives innovation and competitiveness. Curtailing DEI initiatives could produce a less prepared, less cohesive workforce, weakening America’s global standing.

The administration’s push for new accreditors and experimental pathways might sound innovative, but it risks creating a race to the bottom. Without robust federal oversight, fly-by-night institutions could exploit loosened standards, preying on vulnerable students with promises of quick, low-value credentials. The Higher Education Act of 1965 established accreditation as a gatekeeper for federal aid precisely to prevent such abuses. Undermining this system invites chaos, not progress.

The Trump administration’s executive order is a clarion call for those who believe in education as a force for equity and opportunity. Students, faculty, and advocates must rally to protect DEI initiatives, not just for the sake of campuses but for the future of a diverse, dynamic nation. Colleges should double down on their missions, finding creative ways to uphold inclusion within the constraints of this new policy. Accreditors, too, must hold firm, prioritizing student success over political pressure.

Ultimately, the fight for equitable education is about more than policy; it’s about people. It’s about the first-generation student who finds a mentor through a DEI program, the graduate of color who becomes a doctor because of targeted support, the campus community that thrives because all voices are heard. These are the stories at stake, and they demand a response rooted in courage and conviction. The path forward will be challenging, but the cause is too vital to abandon.