The late science fiction writer Octavia Butler once observed, “There is nothing new under the sun, but there are new suns.” This statement has rung true over many years of racial inequality in education.
The same destructive tactics emerge repeatedly, although under different names. Today, these tactics are shrouded in “race-neutral” language and co-opt the framing of the Civil Rights Movement, decrying race-based practices as discriminatory. The objectives of the politicians currently attacking diversity efforts are just as invidious as the Jim Crow laws that the Brown v. Board of Education ruling sought to dismantle more than 70 years ago.
Over and over, we see lawmakers entrench racial inequality in and through public education with a set of tactics I call “deny, defund, and divert.” I use this framework to argue that policymakers seeking to undermine public education do so by denying Black students access to high-quality education, defunding schools serving high numbers of Black students, and diverting Black educators from the teaching workforce.
Of course, this agenda doesn’t just harm Black students. It also hurts students with disabilities, Latinx students, LGBTQIA+ students, and other historically marginalized students. However, anti-Blackness lies at the core of these tactics; the goal is to disempower and disenfranchise Black people and keep them relegated to the underclass. In the 1930s, W.E.B. DuBois termed this “caste education.”
This is how this framework is playing out now:
First, the 2023 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, framed under the guise of “merit” and “fairness” and using Asian American plaintiffs as the new face of massive resistance to racial progress, is being used to deny Black students access to higher education opportunities.
It is predicated on the lie that Black students are unworthy and incapable of competing for admission to the nation’s most selective institutions. The ruling denies the nation’s history of over 240 years of legalized slavery during which education was criminalized for Black people and nearly a century of Jim Crow laws that relegated Black people to segregated, substandard education.
Relying on this ruling, the administration issued a “Dear Colleague” letter last month denying access to accurate and full education by ordering schools to end all race-based programming or risk losing federal funds. The letter has drawn critiques for inaccurately interpreting the case, as well as being overly broad and vague. A recent lawsuit alleges it misrepresents federal law.
The letter is not legally binding, and the federal government cannot dictate curriculum, but that has not prevented the Trump administration from overreaching into state and local curricula. This overreach includes an executive order denouncing what the administration calls “discriminatory equity ideology,” which is not clearly defined but seems to target teachings contrary to the administration’s commitment to a sanitized version of American history. This action seeks to deny students opportunities to learn America’s full history, including its history of racial injustice and the conditions that contribute to it.
Second, the Trump administration seeks to defund vital congressionally appropriated federal education programs and dismantle the U.S. Department of Education. The administration has announced cuts to approximately half the department’s workforce, including staff in its office for civil rights tasked with oversight and enforcement of federal civil rights law. These staff cuts leave an already overburdened and understaffed office without the capacity needed to address civil rights violations. Cuts to the department also eliminate vital training and support for educators serving vulnerable students.
And the administration’s commitment to funnel funds to private voucher programs is the latest manifestation of a strategy that originated post-Brown to evade school integration. Not only do vouchers disproportionately serve students from comparatively wealthier families who can pay the gap between private tuition and voucher amounts, they threaten the fiscal viability of the nation’s public education system as a whole. This is because many education funds “follow the child,” so those children left behind in lower-income communities will essentially be marooned in underresourced public schools.
Finally, the divert prong is exemplified in the dismantling of DEI offices and attacks on personnel dedicated to fostering welcoming school environments for all. Diversity, equity, and inclusion are not dirty words. DEI is about embracing difference, recognizing the ways that inequality impacts individuals, and leveraging our collective strengths. Diversity reflects the American ethos that our differences make us strong. In denouncing “DEI,” the administration not only fails to define it, but instead resorts to lumping it within an alphabet soup of programs related to racial equity that it deems “unacceptable,” like critical race theory.
When I think of DEI, I think of George McLaurin, who was reluctantly admitted to the University of Oklahoma over 70 years ago to complete a Ph.D. in school administration. In a photo I share with my students to exemplify the harm of exclusion, McLaurin sits in a roped-off desk outside the general classroom in an anteroom, sectioned off from his white classmates.
In the library, he was required to sit at a separate desk, only allowed to eat in the cafeteria (also at a designated table) at certain times, and prohibited from interacting with his classmates.
McLaurin’s treatment was not unique—it reflected the racial exclusion many Black students experienced. Segregation operates by emphasizing difference, excluding others, and instilling stigma.
The NAACP Legal Defense Fund took up McLaurin’s case and brought the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. In the 1950 McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, the court ruled unanimously in McLaurin’s favor, citing how exclusion undermined his educational pursuit.
By emphasizing inclusion, DEI initiatives seek to erase the stigma and exclusion of segregation.
As the Supreme Court has recognized for decades, diversity enriches education. Contrary to the political talking points floated by the Trump administration, DEI is not divisive. Dismantling DEI will not only have dangerous implications for education, but it will also undermine our future and strength as a multiracial democracy.
