������

Dear Colleagues,��

Over the past several weeks, University leaders have been in conversation and consultation about how DU is evaluating and responding to new and ever-evolving executive orders and guidance from the federal administration.����

On July 30, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) ��clarifying the government’s position on how federal nondiscrimination laws apply to institutions which receive federal funding, including the ������. The memo clarifies practices that it defines as diversity, equity, and inclusion work—which the DOJ now considers to be unlawful discrimination.��

Many at DU—including us—are deeply disappointed by the DOJ’s interpretation and its potential consequences. We remain firmly committed to inclusivity and fostering a welcoming environment where all can thrive and contribute. We also believe our existing policies and practices support DU community members regardless of their background or protected characteristics such as race, religion, gender, or sexual identity. However, we must take the DOJ’s new interpretation seriously and make appropriate adjustments. Not doing so could have serious consequences for achieving DU’s mission, including potentially losing many millions of dollars in federal support, which would jeopardize life-changing research, students’ access to federal financial aid, and create other personnel and operational impacts.��

What the DOJ Memo Means for DU

The memo focuses on the application of federal laws that prohibit discrimination. It states that even well-intentioned practices may violate the law if they give or appear to give preferential treatment based on protected characteristics. In the memo, the DOJ identified several practices it considers unlawful, which we are now ceasing, including:����

• Race-conscious scholarships and programs: Offering scholarships exclusively for students of a specific racial group. This applies to internships, mentorship programs, or leadership initiatives, as well. In addition, the DOJ views scholarships that target “underserved geographic areas” as unlawful “proxies” if the criteria are chosen to increase participation by specific racial or sex-based groups.��

• Targeted recruitment: Targeting geographic areas, institutions, or organizations based on the racial or ethnic composition of those spaces when recruiting students.����

• Applicant essays and statements: Asking student or employee applicants to describe “obstacles they have overcome” or submit a “diversity statement” in a manner that gives advantage to some over others based on protected status. This includes requiring candidates to demonstrate “cultural competence,” “lived experience,” or “cross-cultural skills” in ways that effectively evaluate candidates’ racial or ethnic backgrounds. As such, diversity statement requirements in faculty and/or staff hiring, and the admissions process, for example, are no longer permissible.��

• DEI training: Requiring training where the "content, structure, or implementation” of the training would stereotype, exclude, or disadvantage based on protected characteristics.��

• Dedicated facilities: Having spaces intended for specified groups that discourage access by students of other races or protected characteristics. The DOJ gives a BIPOC-only study lounge as an example of an illegal space because, even if technically open to all, it can facially discourage access by students of other races.��

Considering the DOJ’s position, the ������ is stopping the activities listed above. While we make changes to our practices in light of the government’s position, we will continually strive to apply these changes through our core values of academic freedom, inclusion, belonging, access to education, and thought pluralism. We are in the process of conducting a review and analysis of our policies and procedures. As such, the Office of General Counsel is working with deans and other University leaders to provide guidance and address concerns case by case.����

Finally, there are referenced and related practices we feel DU can and will continue. Examples of this include our commitment to providing access and support to first-generation students and students with financial need, continuing our commitment to promoting an inclusive community where all enjoy a deep sense of belonging, and providing bias and nondiscrimination trainings to students, faculty, and staff.����

This Moment Calls for Thoughtful and Careful Action

We will continue striving to pursue inclusive excellence while operating within the confines of the law. Thank you for your continued dedication to our shared values, compassion for all members of the DU community, and to the success of our students and colleagues.��

Sincerely,

Jeremy Haefner��
��󲹲Գ�������ǰ���

Mary Clark��
Provost and Executive Vice ��󲹲Գ�������ǰ���

Elizabeth Bullock��
Senior Vice Chancellor for Legal Affairs and General Counsel����

Christopher Whitt��
Vice Chancellor for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion��

��