In a move that has sparked intense debate, Cal Poly Humboldt has severed ties with a racial equity program, leaving many to question the future of diversity initiatives in higher education. But here’s where it gets controversial: this decision comes amid a federal investigation into alleged racial discrimination, raising concerns about the balance between equity and legal compliance. Let’s dive into the details and explore why this story is far from over.
Last month, the U.S. Department of Education announced that 31 universities, including Cal Poly Humboldt, had agreed to end their partnerships with The PhD Project—an organization dedicated to helping racial minorities pursue doctorate degrees. This decision was part of a broader federal probe into programs accused of excluding participants based on race. According to a CSU spokesperson, Amy Bentley-Smith, the partnership with The PhD Project was primarily used to ‘advertise academic employment opportunities.’
And this is the part most people miss: The investigation stems from a Trump Administration directive issued in 2025, which targeted institutions receiving federal funding for their Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs. The directive alleged that such programs discriminated against White and Asian students, a claim that has since been met with significant pushback. In fact, a New Hampshire federal court recently invalidated the directive, stating it could no longer be enforced nationwide. Yet, the ripple effects of this policy are still being felt.
Despite the court ruling, many universities, including Cal Poly Humboldt, chose to cut ties with The PhD Project early on. U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon celebrated these decisions, stating, ‘Institutions of higher education are agreeing to cut ties with discriminatory organizations, recommitting themselves to abiding by federal law, and restoring equality of opportunity on campuses.’ But is this truly a victory for equality, or does it undermine efforts to address systemic disparities?
Here’s where it gets even more complicated: The PhD Project has defended its mission, stating it opened its application process to anyone sharing its vision in early 2025. The organization emphasizes its focus on expanding workplace talent by developing business school faculty who can inspire and mentor future leaders. Critics argue that ending such partnerships disproportionately harms underrepresented groups, while supporters claim it ensures fairness for all students, regardless of race.
The California Faculty Association has accused the CSU system of capitulating to political pressure, while the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has condemned the original directive as unlawful. Yet, the CSU maintains it complies with all state and federal nondiscrimination laws and has conducted a self-review to ensure no partnerships limit participation by race.
So, where do we go from here? As the debate rages on, one thing is clear: the intersection of equity, law, and education remains a contentious battleground. Should universities prioritize targeted programs to address historical inequities, or should they focus on race-neutral approaches to ensure equal opportunity? We want to hear from you. Do you think cutting ties with The PhD Project was the right move? Share your thoughts in the comments below—this conversation is far from over.
