University of Colorado: DEI Efforts Linked to Illegal Hiring Practices

Yesterday, two authors collaborated on an opinion piece for the Wall Street Journal, highlighting how the University of Colorado’s emphasis on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) led to hiring practices that were not only questionable but also illegal.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 clearly prohibits hiring based on race, yet the university’s Faculty Diversity Action Plan seemed to encourage it, and many hiring authorities complied without hesitation.

A hiring proposal obtained by the National Association of Scholars revealed that faculty and staff within the university’s writing and rhetoric program argued that bringing in a “BIPOC” professor—standing for Black, Indigenous, and People of Color—was essential to achieving the department’s goals.

Similarly, the department of Germanic and Slavic languages and literatures planned to hire a German-studies professor by emphasizing the racial diversity of the preferred candidate and how she could incorporate “critical race studies perspectives” into courses on fairy tales and folklore.

The Faculty Diversity Action Plan, operational until 2023 before being restructured and renamed, was instrumental in shaping the university’s hiring decisions. At a 2022 faculty meeting, the dean of the College of Arts and Sciences estimated that approximately 90% of professors were hired through this program or were spousal hires. Despite the legal implications, as outlined by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and reaffirmed by a presidential executive order, departments eagerly competed for funding by showcasing their willingness to discriminate based on race.

Faculty members at the journalism department committed to hiring someone from the BIPOC community, while the geography department aimed to hire a Black, Indigenous, or Latinx faculty member. The authors pointed out this contradiction, as the university’s actions seemed to run counter to its stated concerns about systemic racism.

John Sailer, one of the co-authors and a member of the Manhattan Institute, shared a thread that included communications gathered through a Freedom of Information Act request. These highlighted proposals like the College of Engineering & Applied Sciences’ goal to double its underrepresented faculty and the journalism department’s explicit intent to hire from the BIPOC community.

The College of Media, Communications, and Information emphasized the need to hire Black, Indigenous, Asian American, Latinx, and Pacific Islander faculty. Many of the candidates selected were not only minority members but also advocates of DEI, aligning with the broader goal of making the institution more diverse and aligned with progressive ideologies.

In their Wall Street Journal piece, the authors illustrated how racial and ideological preferences intertwined. A proposal to hire a German studies scholar highlighted her identity as a woman of color and expertise in “anti-racist pedagogy” and “decolonizing German Studies.”

The extent of such practices across universities following 2020 remains unclear, but it is likely not limited to this one institution. Many universities may have similarly engaged in illegal hiring practices to promote progressive agendas, either overtly or through more subtle means.

Jesse Singal and Matt Yglesias expressed concerns about the legal exposures that many universities and progressive nonprofits might face due to their hiring practices over the past decade. It seems the issue has been an open secret, with many in academia and business circles aware but reluctant to challenge these practices publicly.

Max Abrahms shared an experience of seeing qualified candidates removed from application pools for not addressing diversity needs, illustrating how widespread and systemic these practices have become. Others in the private sector acknowledged the reality of hiring based on identity rather than merit.

Those responsible faced a choice between adhering to the law or yielding to the demands of radical cultural movements. They chose the latter, breaking the law in the process. Now, there is increased scrutiny and potential accountability for these actions.

The call for a thorough investigation into universities receiving public funds is growing. Such an investigation would aim to uncover similar practices across other institutions. It is suggested that individuals responsible for these hiring decisions be held accountable, potentially leading to dismissals or legal action.

The current situation demands universities preserve their documents as scrutiny intensifies. This could lead to actual social justice, ensuring that hiring practices are fair and based on merit rather than race or ideology. The expectation is that, had the roles been reversed, with a focus on hiring white faculty, swift federal intervention would have ensued, setting a precedent for accountability.