# data[].attributes.body
My desired future role is to work in student affairs in a multicultural office. I chose the topic of diversity discrimination because this will tie in closely with my future role. The targeted audience for this topic is higher education professionals who currently or will work in multicultural offices.

# data[].attributes.body
Diversity is realizing and understanding social and ethnical differences among people. Equity is being treated fair. Inclusion is providing equal access to opportunities and resources for all people. Discrimination is when an individual or group of people are treated differently based on their age, race, ethnicity, body type/size, sexual orientation, and more. Diversity, equity, and inclusion discrimination is a rising topic in the student affairs community and in society. DEI is a broad topic that affects students with disabilities, veterans, minority students, international students, and more. This topic is especially important to students and the importance increases as the new generations come to college. If the institution does not want to be labeled as discriminating against diversity, equity, and inclusion, then it is important for professionals to know how to protect against that.

# data[].attributes.body
By addressing ongoing and new policy concerns that touch on the identities of many underrepresented minority college students, the Center for First-generation Student Success strengthens those initiatives.

This article informs about the dangers of diminishing diversity, equity, and inclusion practices on campus (discrimination). NASPA is already seeing students, staff, and faculty changing their choice of institution based on state politics. This results in a loss for the institution, which is crucial for the institutions earnings.

NASPA. (n.d.). Anti-dei legislation response and resources. https://www.naspa.org/news/anti-dei-legislation-response-and-resources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Recent state-level legislation questioning the very foundation of higher education to prepare diverse graduates to lead inclusively for a complex and globally-connected world has us at NASPA feeling, at times, disheartened and also recommitted to our collective purpose to fulfill the purpose of higher education.

As of May 1, dozens of state-level bills targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives have been introduced in this cycle, two have final legislative approval, and one has been signed into law by a governor. The legislation is extremely problematic, especially when coupled with a potential dismantling of race-conscious admissions by the U.S. Supreme Court. Even where bills have not moved forward for votes, also harmful is the debate regarding these bills, which is rife with inaccuracies and contributes to a climate of uncertainty, fear, and violence.

During and following the NASPA Annual Conference last month, we heard from attendees in multiple settings that this legislation is causing student affairs staff and graduate students to reexamine why, how, and where they work and learn. Some are reconsidering job and admission offers, and others may have obligations that do not allow them to relocate. Many expressed the need to be in places where these debates are taking place to support students and engage in advocacy, and yet they also shared the emotional toll of this labor.

To our members and all student affairs educators: You and your work matter deeply. You create environments where all students have the opportunity to learn and develop, and for many of us in the field, we do this work because of who we are and the educational experiences we have had. Our work is both personal and political.

The coordinated, intersectional nature of attacks on diversity, equity, and inclusion - targeting queer and trans students, undermining programs focused on BIPOC students, dehumanizing and threatening educators - create toxic educational and work climates for students, staff, and faculty and exacerbate enrollment, hiring, and retention challenges for institutions.

The core of DEI work on campuses is to create climates in which all students can learn and develop. DEI initiatives account for less than one percent of institutional spending and yield outsized benefits for institutions in terms of student recruitment and retention, faculty hiring and retention, a positive climate for learning and working, and workforce preparation for graduates.

Rhetoric and legislative action that devalues higher education and diminishes diversity will result in tangibly negative consequences for institutions and subsequently the places where they are located. The contributions of higher education to local and state economies are widely documented. Colleges and universities draw economic investment and industry, boost earning power and tax base, upskill workers, and promote innovation and entrepreneurship. Already students are changing their higher education choices because of states' social policies, with institutions losing opportunities to enroll out-of-state and in-state students and faculty changing how and what they teach. Legislation introduced in some states would affect accreditation and eligibility for federal funding, reducing resources that support all students.

We understand that this legislation represents a reaction to the progress enacted over time by diverse students and educators. We are committed to advocating for higher education to maintain a strategic and needed focus on educating and developing students to understand and address the realities of injustice and inequity. Diversity, equity, and inclusion work remains as critical as it has ever been.

NASPA has created this web page to share resources and strategies, track legislation, solicit input, and provide opportunities to gather and learn. This page will be updated regularly, and we welcome feedback about what our members would find helpful. We invite you to share your experiences and ideas using this form. Your input will help NASPA to shape responses and programs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Anti-DEI Legislation Response and Resources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Recent state-level legislation questioning the very foundation of higher education to prepare diverse graduates to lead inclusively for a complex and globally-connected world has us at NASPA feeling, at times, disheartened and also recommitted to our collective purpose to fulfill the purpose of higher education.

# data[].attributes.body
UT System has paused DEI efforts ahead of formal restrictions from policymakers.

The board claimed DEI efforts have deviated from their original intended purpose, but failed to name which initiatives have deviated.

The decision has caught the attention of free speech advocates.

Those against DEI claim the initiatives are discriminatory and others claim it was created to help historically marginalized individuals.

Bauer-Wolf, J. (2023, February 23). University of Texas system pauses diversity, equity, an inclusion policies, saying some 'have strayed'. Higher Ed Dive. https://www.highereddive.com/news/university-of-texas-system-pauses-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-policies/643387/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Listen to the article 5 min

Opponents of DEI practices generally argue they indoctrinate students to discriminatory values. However, DEI work emerged from the desire to put historically marginalized individuals - like those who are racial minorities and those with disabilities - on the track to upward social mobility. Colleges have turned to these policies partially as an acknowledgment that they have not always helped these groups.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
University of Texas System pauses diversity, equity and inclusion policies, saying some 'have strayed'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The 244,000-student system took the step following Republican criticisms against DEI work.

# data[].attributes.body
Institution's have made efforts to instill a diverse community on their campuses.

Some claim the DEI efforts help minority groups join campuses they may not have been able to join before and others claim DEI violates free speech, antidiscrimination laws, and institutions are misusing public money.

The Chronicle of Higher Education. (n.d.). The assault on DEI. https://www.chronicle.com/package/the-assault-on-dei

# data[].attributes.headline
7. Statutory Law: Title IX of the Education Amendment of 1972

# data[].attributes.subject
7. Statutory Law: Title IX of the Education Amendment of 1972

# data[].attributes.body
Brief summary of the law: Prohibits discrimination based on sex (gender identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy) in education programs and activities that receive federal financial assistance. Congress modeled Title IX with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act in mind. Again, students can claim sex discrimination if denied participation in education programs and activities, discrimination can be claimed against the institution.

20 U.S.C. §1681-§1688

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
§1681. Sex

(a) Prohibition against discrimination; exceptions

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance, except that:

(1) Classes of educational institutions subject to prohibition

in regard to admissions to educational institutions, this section shall apply only to institutions of vocational education, professional education, and graduate higher education, and to public institutions of undergraduate higher education;

(2) Educational institutions commencing planned change in admissions

in regard to admissions to educational institutions, this section shall not apply (A) for one year from June 23, 1972, nor for six years after June 23, 1972, in the case of an educational institution which has begun the process of changing from being an institution which admits only students of one sex to being an institution which admits students of both sexes, but only if it is carrying out a plan for such a change which is approved by the Secretary of Education or (B) for seven years from the date an educational institution begins the process of changing from being an institution which admits only students of only one sex to being an institution which admits students of both sexes, but only if it is carrying out a plan for such a change which is approved by the Secretary of Education, whichever is the later;

(3) Educational institutions of religious organizations with contrary religious tenets

this section shall not apply to an educational institution which is controlled by a religious organization if the application of this subsection would not be consistent with the religious tenets of such organization;

(4) Educational institutions training individuals for military services or merchant marine

this section shall not apply to an educational institution whose primary purpose is the training of individuals for the military services of the United States, or the merchant marine;

(5) Public educational institutions with traditional and continuing admissions policy

in regard to admissions this section shall not apply to any public institution of undergraduate higher education which is an institution that traditionally and continually from its establishment has had a policy of admitting only students of one sex;

(6) Social fraternities or sororities; voluntary youth service organizations

this section shall not apply to membership practices-

(A) of a social fraternity or social sorority which is exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of title 26, the active membership of which consists primarily of students in attendance at an institution of higher education, or

(B) of the Young Men's Christian Association, Young Women's Christian Association, Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, Camp Fire Girls, and voluntary youth service organizations which are so exempt, the membership of which has traditionally been limited to persons of one sex and principally to persons of less than nineteen years of age;

(7) Boy or Girl conferences

this section shall not apply to-

(A) any program or activity of the American Legion undertaken in connection with the organization or operation of any Boys State conference, Boys Nation conference, Girls State conference, or Girls Nation conference; or

(B) any program or activity of any secondary school or educational institution specifically for-

(i) the promotion of any Boys State conference, Boys Nation conference, Girls State conference, or Girls Nation conference; or

(ii) the selection of students to attend any such conference;

(8) Father-son or mother-daughter activities at educational institutions

this section shall not preclude father-son or mother-daughter activities at an educational institution, but if such activities are provided for students of one sex, opportunities for reasonably comparable activities shall be provided for students of the other sex; and

(9) Institution of higher education scholarship awards in "beauty" pageants

this section shall not apply with respect to any scholarship or other financial assistance awarded by an institution of higher education to any individual because such individual has received such award in any pageant in which the attainment of such award is based upon a combination of factors related to the personal appearance, poise, and talent of such individual and in which participation is limited to individuals of one sex only, so long as such pageant is in compliance with other nondiscrimination provisions of Federal law.

(b) Preferential or disparate treatment because of imbalance in participation or receipt of Federal benefits; statistical evidence of imbalance

Nothing contained in subsection (a) of this section shall be interpreted to require any educational institution to grant preferential or disparate treatment to the members of one sex on account of an imbalance which may exist with respect to the total number or percentage of persons of that sex participating in or receiving the benefits of any federally supported program or activity, in comparison with the total number or percentage of persons of that sex in any community, State, section, or other area: Provided, That this subsection shall not be construed to prevent the consideration in any hearing or proceeding under this chapter of statistical evidence tending to show that such an imbalance exists with respect to the participation in, or receipt of the benefits of, any such program or activity by the members of one sex.

(c) "Educational institution" defined

For purposes of this chapter an educational institution means any public or private preschool, elementary, or secondary school, or any institution of vocational, professional, or higher education, except that in the case of an educational institution composed of more than one school, college, or department which are administratively separate units, such term means each such school, college, or department.

( Pub. L. 92-318, title IX, §901, June 23, 1972, 86 Stat. 373; Pub. L. 93-568, §3(a), Dec. 31, 1974, 88 Stat. 1862; Pub. L. 94-482, title IV, §412(a), Oct. 12, 1976, 90 Stat. 2234; Pub. L. 96-88, title III, §301(a)(1), title V, §507, Oct. 17, 1979, 93 Stat. 677, 692; Pub. L. 99-514, §2, Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2095.)

Editorial Notes

References in Text

This chapter, referred to in subsecs. (b) and (c), was in the original "this title", meaning title IX of Pub. L. 92-318 which enacted this chapter and amended sections 203 and 213 of Title 29, Labor, and sections 2000c, 2000c-6, 2000c-9, and 2000h-2 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare. For complete classification of title IX to the Code, see Short Title note below and Tables.

Amendments

1986-Subsec. (a)(6)(A). Pub. L. 99-514 substituted "Internal Revenue Code of 1986" for "Internal Revenue Code of 1954", which for purposes of codification was translated as "title 26" thus requiring no change in text.

1976-Subsec. (a)(6) to (9). Pub. L. 94-482 substituted "this" for "This" in par. (6) and added pars. (7) to (9).

1974-Subsec. (a)(6). Pub. L. 93-568 added par. (6).

Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries

Effective Date of 1976 Amendment

Pub. L. 94-482, title IV, §412(b), Oct. 12, 1976, 90 Stat. 2234, provided that: "The amendment made by subsection (a) [amending this section] shall take effect upon the date of enactment of this Act [Oct. 12, 1976]."

Effective Date of 1974 Amendment

Pub. L. 93-568, §3(b), Dec. 31, 1974, 88 Stat. 1862, provided that: "The provisions of the amendment made by subsection (a) [amending this section] shall be effective on, and retroactive to, July 1, 1972."

Short Title of 1988 Amendment

Pub. L. 100-259, §1, Mar. 22, 1988, 102 Stat. 28, provided that: "This Act [enacting sections 1687 and 1688 of this title and section 2000d-4a of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, amending sections 706 and 794 of Title 29, Labor, and section 6107 of Title 42, and enacting provisions set out as notes under sections 1687 and 1688 of this title] may be cited as the 'Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987'."

Short Title

Pub. L. 107-255, Oct. 29, 2002, 116 Stat. 1734, provided "That title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.; Public Law 92-318) [title IX of Pub. L. 92-318, enacting this chapter and amending sections 203 and 213 of Title 29, Labor, and sections 2000c, 2000c-6, 2000c-9, and 2000h-2 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare] may be cited as the 'Patsy Takemoto Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act'."

Transfer of Functions

"Secretary" substituted for "Commissioner" in subsec. (a)(2) pursuant to sections 301(a)(1) and 507 of Pub. L. 96-88, which are classified to sections 3441(a)(1) and 3507 of this title and which transferred functions of Commissioner of Education to Secretary of Education.

Regulations; Nature of Particular Sports: Intercollegiate Athletic Activities

Pub. L. 93-380, title VIII, §844, Aug. 21, 1974, 88 Stat. 612, directed Secretary to prepare and publish, not more than 30 days after Aug. 21, 1974, proposed regulations implementing the provisions of this chapter regarding prohibition of sex discrimination in federally assisted programs, including reasonable regulations for intercollegiate athletic activities considering the nature of the particular sports.

Executive Documents

Coordination of Implementation and Enforcement of Provisions

For provisions relating to the coordination of implementation and enforcement of the provisions of this chapter by the Attorney General, see section 1-201(b) of Ex. Ord. No. 12250, Nov. 2, 1980, 45 F.R. 72995, set out under section 2000d-1 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare.

Ex. Ord. No. 14021. Guaranteeing an Educational Environment Free From Discrimination on the Basis of Sex, Including Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity

Ex. Ord. No. 14021, Mar. 8, 2021, 86 F.R. 13803, provided:

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Policy. It is the policy of my Administration that all students should be guaranteed an educational environment free from discrimination on the basis of sex, including discrimination in the form of sexual harassment, which encompasses sexual violence, and including discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. For students attending schools and other educational institutions that receive Federal financial assistance, this guarantee is codified, in part, in Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance.

Sec. 2. Review of Agency Actions. (a) Within 100 days of the date of this order [Mar. 8, 2021], the Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Attorney General, shall review all existing regulations, orders, guidance documents, policies, and any other similar agency actions (collectively, agency actions) that are or may be inconsistent with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order, and provide the findings of this review to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

(i) As part of the review required under subsection (a) of this section, the Secretary of Education shall review the rule entitled "Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance," 85 FR 30026 (May 19, 2020), and any other agency actions taken pursuant to that rule, for consistency with governing law, including Title IX, and with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.

(ii) As soon as practicable, and as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, the Secretary of Education shall review existing guidance and issue new guidance as needed on the implementation of the rule described in subsection (a)(i) of this section, for consistency with governing law, including Title IX, and with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.

(iii) The Secretary of Education shall consider suspending, revising, or rescinding-or publishing for notice and comment proposed rules suspending, revising, or rescinding-those agency actions that are inconsistent with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order as soon as practicable and as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, and may issue such requests for information as would facilitate doing so.

(b) The Secretary of Education shall consider taking additional enforcement actions, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, to enforce the policy set forth in section 1 of this order as well as legal prohibitions on sex discrimination in the form of sexual harassment, which encompasses sexual violence, to the fullest extent permissible under law; to account for intersecting forms of prohibited discrimination that can affect the availability of resources and support for students who have experienced sex discrimination, including discrimination on the basis of race, disability, and national origin; to account for the significant rates at which students who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) are subject to sexual harassment, which encompasses sexual violence; to ensure that educational institutions are providing appropriate support for students who have experienced sex discrimination; and to ensure that their school procedures are fair and equitable for all.

Sec. 3. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

J.R. Biden, Jr.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
(a) Prohibition against discrimination; exceptions No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance, except that: (1) Classes of educational institutions subject

# data[].attributes.headline
6. Statutory Law: Title III and VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

# data[].attributes.subject
6. Statutory Law: Title III and VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

# data[].attributes.body
Title III
Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000b-2000b-3

Title III is known as the desegregation of public facilities. Title III prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin in public facilities (parks, libraries, auditoriums, and prisons). This relates to students being able to host and participate in campus events.

Title VI

Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.

Title VI protects citizens by prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program or activity that receives federal funds or federal financial assistance. This should not be confused with Title VII, which prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Institutions cannot discriminate against students based on race, color, and more. If students do not receive proper minority representation, they can claim discrimination.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
EnlargeDownload Link Citation: Civil Rights Act of 1964; 7/2/1964; Enrolled Acts and Resolutions of Congress, 1789 - 2011; General Records of the United States Government, Record Group 11; National Archives Building, Washington, DC. View All Pages in the National Archives Catalog View Transcript This act, signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson on July 2, 1964, prohibited discrimination in public places, provided for the integration of schools and other public facilities, and made employment discrimination illegal. It was the most sweeping civil rights legislation since Reconstruction.

# data[].attributes.headline
8. United States Constitution: 14th Amendment

# data[].attributes.subject
8. United States Constitution: 14th Amendment

# data[].attributes.body
The title of the Amendment is Citizenship Rights, Equal Protection, Apportionment, Civil War Debt. The 14th amendment granted citizenship to all people born in the United States. This includes formerly enslaved men and women. Two main points of the 14th amendment which relate to my topic of discrimination are the protection of citizenship and equal protection from governmental entities.

U.S. Const. amend. XIV

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
: Analysis and Interpretation of the of the US Constitution

# data[].attributes.body
The bill restricts state public institutions from promoting equitable access to higher education and diversity among students faculty, and staff. The bill was passed on June 17, 2023 and will go into effect on January 1, 2024. It requires institutions to close their DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) offices. This can have a negative effect on students and make those from underrepresented groups feel unwelcome and hurt the efforts that were made to extinguish discrimination on campus.

Tex. S.B.17, 88th Leg., R. (2023)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
88(R) SB 17 - Enrolled version - Bill Text

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
relating to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives at public

# data[].attributes.headline
10. Non-Discrimination and Anti-Harassment Policy and Complaint Procedure

# data[].attributes.subject
10. Non-Discrimination and Anti-Harassment Policy and Complaint Procedure

# data[].attributes.body
OP 16.02 Non-Discrimination and Ant-Harassment Policy and Complaint Procedure works to comply with federal and state employment laws and regulations. The purpose of the policy is to provide a safe non-discriminatory education, working, and living environments on campus for students, staff, faculty, and visitors.

Angelo State University. (2020). Affirmative Action Plan, OP 16.02. https://angelo.policystat.com/policy/12145020/latest

# data[].attributes.body
Ethical Principle 2 in the ACPA Ethical Principles and Standards discusses the importance of student learning and development. According to ACPA (2020), "[student] Development is complex and includes cognitive, physical, moral, social, emotional, career, spiritual, personal, and intellectual dimensions. Professionals must be sensitive to and knowledgeable about the variety of backgrounds, cultures, experiences, abilities, personal characteristics and viewpoints evident in the student population and be able to incorporate appropriate theoretical perspectives to identify learning opportunities and to reduce barriers to development" (p. 3). Multicultural or diversity, equity, and inclusion competence is fundamental for student affairs professionals.

ACPA College Student Educators International. (2020). Statement of ethical principles & standards. [PDF]. https://myacpa.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Ethical_Principles_Standards.pdf

# data[].attributes.body
This book discusses the importance of why diversity equity and inclusion are of importance in higher education. The book is split into 16 chapters. It begins with discussing how governing boards decisions affect institutions and how the boards were created in a time of traditional values. It calls for a board that better represents the public as times have changed. The book then moves to discuss how diversity, equity, and inclusion in board members is vital, since board members make decisions about the life, culture, and functionality of the institution.

Rall, R. M., Morgan, D. L., & Commodore, F. (2019). Invisible injustice: Higher education boards and issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion. IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-5724-1.ch016

# data[].attributes.headline
13. Bulleted List of Recommendations/Best Practices for Compliance

# data[].attributes.subject
13. Bulleted List of Recommendations/Best Practices for Compliance

# data[].attributes.body
Create an open line of communication between staff, students, and departments.

Create and distribute online or printed copies of the new policy that is establishing change within the multicultural programs.

Meet with student leaders and/or organizations to discuss diversity discrimination and the changes in laws and policies.

Remove the term diversity, equity, and inclusion from institutional events/practices.

Establish a safe line or safe space for students.

Continue to represent underrepresented or marginalized groups without using the terms diversity, equity, and inclusion and without having an established DEI office on campus.