H.Hrg.119

1[House Hearing, 119 Congress]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34                 COMBATING DEI IN AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS56=======================================================================78                                HEARING910                               before the1112               TASK FORCE ON DEFENDING CONSTITUTIONAL13              RIGHTS AND EXPOSING INSTITUTIONAL ABUSES1415                                 of the1617                      COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND18                          GOVERNMENT REFORM1920                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES2122                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS2324                             SECOND SESSION25                               __________2627                             JULY 14, 202628                               __________2930                           Serial No. 119-6931                               __________3233Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform3435                [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]3637    Available on: govinfo.gov, oversight.house.gov or docs.house.gov38                                ______3940                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE414264-224 PDF                WASHINGTON : 20264344              COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM4546                    JAMES COMER, Kentucky, Chairman4748Jim Jordan, Ohio                     Robert Garcia, California, Ranking49Mike Turner, Ohio                        Minority Member50Paul Gosar, Arizona                  Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of51Virginia Foxx, North Carolina            Columbia52Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin            Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts53Michael Cloud, Texas                 Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois54Gary Palmer, Alabama                 Ro Khanna, California55Clay Higgins, Louisiana              Kweisi Mfume, Maryland56Pete Sessions, Texas                 Shontel Brown, Ohio57Andy Biggs, Arizona                  Melanie Stansbury, New Mexico58Nancy Mace, South Carolina           Maxwell Frost, Florida59Pat Fallon, Texas                    Greg Casar, Texas60Byron Donalds, Florida               Jasmine Crockett, Texas61Scott Perry, Pennsylvania            Emily Randall, Washington62William Timmons, South Carolina      Suhas Subramanyam, Virginia63Tim Burchett, Tennessee              Yassamin Ansari, Arizona64Lauren Boebert, Colorado             Wesley Bell, Missouri65Anna Paulina Luna, Florida           Lateefah Simon, California66Nick Langworthy, New York            Dave Min, California67Eric Burlison, Missouri              James Walkinshaw, Virginia68Elijah Crane, Arizona                Christian Menefee, Texas69Brian Jack, Georgia                  Ayanna Pressley, Massachusetts70John McGuire, Virginia               Rashida Tlaib, Michigan71Brandon Gill, Texas72Richard McCormick, Georgia7374                                 ------7576                       Mark Marin, Staff Director77                   James Rust, Deputy Staff Director78                     Ryan Giachetti, Chief Counsel79              Karl Keyzer-Andre, Professional Staff Member80                          Rodney Rios, Counsel81         Mallory Cogar, Director of Operations and Chief Clerk8283                      Contact Number: 202-225-50748485                Robert Edmonson, Minority Staff Director86                      Contact Number: 202-225-50518788                                 ------8990      Task Force on Defending Constitutional Rights and Exposing91                          Institutional Abuses9293                     Brandon Gill, Texas, Chairman9495Jim Jordan, Ohio                     Lateefah Simon, California,96Michael Cloud, Texas                     Ranking Member97Andy Biggs, Arizona                  Dave Min, California98Byron Donalds, Florida               James Walkinshaw, Virginia99Brian Jack, Georgia                  Ayanna Pressley, Massachusetts100101                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S102103                              ----------104105                           OPENING STATEMENTS106107                                                                   Page108109Hon. Brandon Gill, U.S. Representative, Chairman.................     1110111Hon. Lateefah Simon, U.S. Representative, Ranking Member.........     2112113                               WITNESSES114115Mr. Mike Gonzalez, Angeles T. Arredondo E Pluribus Unum Senior116  Fellow, The Heritage Foundation117Oral Statement...................................................     5118119Ms. Inez Feltscher Stepman, Senior Policy and Legal Analyst,120  Independent Women121Oral Statement...................................................     6122123Dr. Michael Shires, Ph.D., Vice Chair of Education Opportunity,124  Higher Education, and Senior Policy Officer, America First125  Policy Institute126Oral Statement...................................................     8127128Written opening statements and bios are available on the U.S.129  House of Representatives Document Repository at:130  docs.house.gov.131132                           INDEX OF DOCUMENTS133134  * Article, The Hill, ``Asian American Students Were Victims of135  Racial Discrimination''; submitted by Rep. Gill.136137  * Article, Washington Times, ``DEI has Jeopardized Air138  Safety''; submitted by Rep. Gill.139140  * Article, Washington Examiner, ``DEI Policies Threaten Medical141  Excellence''; submitted by Rep. Gill.142143  * Article, The Heritage Foundation, ``The Left's Incurable DEI144  Addiction''; submitted by Rep. Gill.145146  * Article, AMAC, ``Uncovering Radical Efforts to Disguise147  DEI''; submitted by Rep. Gill.148149  * Press Release, ``Justice Dept Investigation Determines UCLA's150  Medical School Discriminated Based on Race in Admissions'';151  submitted by Rep. Gill.152153  * Article, America First Legal, ``CMS Removes Biden-Era DEI154  Framework from Kidney Transplant Program''; submitted by Rep.155  Jack.156157  * Article, Fox News, ``Watchdog Urges DOJ Probe of Top Research158  University Over Alleged Illegal DEI Practices''; submitted by159  Rep. Jack.160161  * Press Release, ``U.S. Department of Education's Office for162  Civil Rights Launches Title VI Investigation Into Fairfax Co163  Public Schools''; submitted by Rep. Jack.164165  * Article, TDR, ``DOGE Cancels Affordable Housing Deals in166  Anti-DEI Push''; submitted by Rep. Menefee.167168  * Article, Brookings Institute, ``How Racial Bias in Appraisals169  Affects the Devaluation of Homes in Majority Black170  Neighborhoods''; submitted by Rep. Menefee.171172  * Article, CNN, ``Trump's Diversity Purge Freezes Hundreds of173  Millions in Medical Research at Universities Across the174  Country''; submitted by Rep. Min.175176  * Article, Yahoo, ``Civil Rights Organizations and Nonprofits177  Signed Letter Demanding Transparency and Response From the178  Trump Administration Regarding DEIA Ban''; submitted by Rep.179  Pressley.180181  * Article, Time Magazine, ``How Trump's Attacks on DEI are182  Hurting Communities That Voted for Him''; submitted by Rep.183  Simon.184185  * Article, CNN, ``Trump's Gutting of Federal DEI Programs will186  Hit Rural Poor''; submitted by Rep. Simon.187188  * Article, Military Times, ``Ending Military Diversity Efforts189  Will Cost Us Talent and Readiness''; submitted by Rep.190  Walkinshaw.191192  * Article, NPR, ``Defense Secretary Hegseth Intervened to Stop193  Promotions of Black and Female Officers''; submitted by Rep.194  Walkinshaw.195196The documents listed above are available at: docs.house.gov.197198                 COMBATING DEI IN AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS199200                              ----------201202                         TUESDAY, JULY 14, 2026203204                     U.S. House of Representatives205206              Committee on Oversight and Government Reform207208      Task Force on Defending Constitutional Rights and Exposing209210                          Institutional Abuses211212                                                   Washington, D.C.213214    The Task Force met, pursuant to notice, at 10:12 a.m., Room2152154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Brandon Gill,216[Chairman of the Task Force] presiding.217    Present: Representatives Gill, Donalds, Jack, Simon, Min,218Walkinshaw, and Pressley.219    Also present: Representative Menefee.220    Mr. Gill. This hearing of the Task Force on Defending221Constitutional Rights and Exposing Institutional Abuses will222come to order.223    Welcome, everybody. Thank you all for taking the time to be224here.225    Without objection, the Chair may declare recess at any226time. I recognize myself for the purpose of making an opening227statement.228229           OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN BRANDON GILL230231                   REPRESENTATIVE FROM TEXAS232233    Good morning, and welcome to today's hearing before the234Task Force on Defending Constitutional Rights and Exposing235Institutional Abuses on the discriminatory, harmful, and often236illegal nature of so-called diversity, equity, and inclusion,237or DEI, policies.238    DEI is, by its very nature, an affront to the principles239and ideals that define our great Nation and a rejection of the240progress our predecessors made in ensuring civil rights241protections for all Americans. Our Forefathers fought and died242to ensure that this country would be a place where every person243has the opportunity to achieve great things as the fruit of his244or her own talents and hard work. Civil rights leaders of the2451950s and 1960s fought tirelessly in the pursuit of these same246principles to ensure that America would not be judged by the247color of their skin, but by the content of their character.248    Today, DEI has become a euphemism for a Marxist ideology,249which seeks to undo those very efforts by civil rights leaders250like Martin Luther King and his contemporaries. DEI represents251a conscious effort to specifically judge people by the color of252their skin and other immutable characteristics. Not only is253this an utterly disgusting and racist ideology, but it is also254a clear violation of the Constitution and Federal law.255    Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 clearly prohibits256unlawful employment practices that discriminate against an257individual because of such individual's race, color, religion,258sex, or national origin. And the Supreme Court ruled in a 2023259case that the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to260the Constitution prohibits racial discrimination in college261admissions practices.262    Meanwhile, DEI policies embody racist and stereotypical263attitudes harbored by the left toward groups that these264policies purport to benefit. Do Democrats believe that people265they would categorize as diverse do not possess the skills to266succeed in our society without quotas or preferential267treatment? Apparently, yes. We know this because the mask268slipped, and they admit this explicitly. New York Governor and269Democrat Kathy Hochul patronizingly claimed in 2024 that270``Black kids growing up in the Bronx don't even know what the271word computer is.'' I guess if you believe that nonsense, DEI272makes a lot more sense.273    And it is not just prominent Democrat politicians. Some of274the largest American companies bought into this absurdity. For275instance, companies such as Macy's, BlackRock, Starbucks,276Disney, Google, Amazon, among others, in recent history277instituted aggressive DEI policies. In higher education,278institutions have, in open defiance of the Supreme Court,279merely rebranded the racist DEI practices while continuing to280seek out novel means to racially categorize and then281discriminate against individuals. To combat this, the Trump282Administration has taken historic action to enforce Federal283civil rights law and ensure all Americans are protected from284discrimination.285    Despite this bold stance against discriminatory practices,286this Committee is concerned that the DEI proponents in industry287and academia are just biding their time. The behavior of the288radical left indicates that DEI is not truly eradicated from289our society, but merely lying dormant and licking its wounds290until it has an opportunity to rise again. If the left does not291abandon this obsession, where will that lead our country?292    I look forward to a discussion today on how we can work293toward a society that has eradicated insidious discrimination294under the guise of DEI.295    And with that, I yield to the Ranking Member, Ms. Simon,296for her opening statement.297298              OPENING STATEMENT OF RANKING MEMBER299300                         LATEEFAH SIMON301302                 REPRESENTATIVE FROM CALIFORNIA303304    Ms. Simon. Thank you, and good morning, Mr. Chairman, and305good morning to the witnesses. Thank you all for coming here306today.307    And before I begin my opening statement, I would, in308thinking about this hearing and thinking about the recent309passing of one of my core mentors, Dr. Clarence Jones, who was310the attorney and speechwriter for Dr. Martin Luther King. Mr.311Jones, for many folks who have followed the civil rights312movement, has been a seminal and clear voice of what is in313front of us as a Nation. And I think of him, and I think of his314words and his teachings as we move through today's315conversation.316    So, you know, it is with that, that I am so thankful that317we are all here to have the conversation. And I do also think318that it is extremely appropriate that we are meeting today,319just weeks after the Supreme Court struck down Donald Trump's320effort to redefine what it means to be an American. Because321that is the real issue at stake today. That is what we are322talking about today. Who counts? Who belongs? And who deserves323a seat at the table? The question before us is simple. Will we324welcome Americans who look and pray and love or think325differently? Or will we turn our backs on the diversity that326has always made this country stronger?327    Mr. Chairman, these questions, we know, are not new.328Throughout our history in this country, these arguments have329been made by people convinced that they were defending America.330When Strom Thurmond held the Floor on this campus for 24 hours331against the Civil Rights bill, he insisted that he hated no one332and that he was only defending the Constitution. George Wallace333claimed he was preserving order when he said, ``Segregation334now, segregation tomorrow, and segregation forever.''335    In 1956, 101 Members of this body stood and signed the336Southern Manifesto insisting that school desegregation was337unconstitutional. Yes, school desegregation was338unconstitutional. And let me just say that one more time. It339was 101 Members of the U.S. Congress who stood firmly with the340ideals listed out in the Southern Manifesto. They believed that341they were on the right side of history. And that is not ancient342history. That is the world that my own mother was born and343raised in, in the deep rural South.344    I raise this history, Mr. Chairman, because the arguments345before us today, this morning, are from a mirrored pattern.346Now, let me say something about the three letters at the center347of today's hearing. Our Chairman cited those three letters as a348pretext for discrimination. That has not been the experience.349In the institutions that I have served and some that I have350run, those three words meant ensuring that a veteran had the351desk that they needed, that they could use. That disabled352veteran rallied for accommodations, and they got it. It means a353first-generation student who needed a mentor and a worker who354knew how to report the abuse that they had received and they355were heard. None of that is quota. None of that takes a seat356for anyone. The law forbids discrimination, and it forbids it357for all of us, every single one of us in this room.358    Today, the Majority will speak about fairness, but fairness359means recognizing that for most of our history there was one360group of Americans who had been ushered to the front of the361line. That is not hyperbole; that is fact. After generations,362that head start began to feel something like an inheritance,363and sharing that opportunity feels like loss. But acknowledging364that head start, removing those barriers, and expanding365opportunity, it is not discrimination. When someone sees a few366more chairs at the table and calls it a takeover, we hear367discomfort. That opportunity is no longer reserved for those368who have always and already had it, but the opportunity belongs369to every American.370    Wealthy and powerful people want to weaponize that371discomfort, to divide us, to divide you, to distract you, and372to entrench the power that they still hold behind the scenes,373but justice does not diminish anyone. It simply makes room for374everyone. If my colleagues truly cared about the thumb on the375scale, the record is waiting.376    Black workers with the same credentials are still hired--377this is fact--and paid less with the same credentials of their378White counterparts. Students from the wealthiest one percent of379families in this country are more than twice as likely to380attend top colleges than their middle-class counterparts with381similar test scores. That is fact. At Harvard, a study found382that three out of four legacies, donors, staff, recruited383athletes, those admittance would not have been admitted without384those preferences. That is a thumb on the scale. The heavy385thumb on that scale has always been pressed for folks who386needed it the least.387    So, I have a question as I close for every single witness388that has come here today and the ones that will follow. If389fairness is truly your principle, are you prepared to challenge390every unfair advantage or only the efforts designed to expand391opportunity for those folks who have too often been left out?392    Now, I love this country enough to tell the truth about it.393The signers of the 1956 Southern Manifesto in defense of school394desegregation, against school desegregation, were lawyers and395they were statesmen and elected as well, sure of their footing,396and the record kept their names. The record kept their names to397place a count on what they chose. There will be a record of398this morning as well, read one day by people who will never,399never meet our faces and they will precisely--they will know400exactly what side we chose to defend. I have chosen mine.401    Mr. Chairman, I would yield back.402    Mr. Gill. Thank you, Ranking Member Simon.403    And now without objection, Representatives Clay Higgins of404Louisiana and Mr. Menefee of Texas are waived on to the Task405Force for the purpose of asking questions at today's hearing.406    I would like to welcome our witnesses for being here, and407thank you for being here. First, we have Mike Gonzalez, the408Angeles T. Arredondo E Pluribus Unum Senior Fellow at The409Heritage Foundation. Next, we have Inez Feltscher Stepman,410Senior Policy and Legal Analyst at Independent Women. We are411also joined by Dr. Michael Shires, the Vice Chair of Education,412Opportunity, Higher Education, and Senior Policy Officer at the413America First Policy Institute. So, thank you all for joining414us. I am really looking forward to hearing your testimony as415well.416    Pursuant to Committee Rule 9(g), will the witnesses please417stand and raise their right hand?418    Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony that you419are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing420but the truth, so help you God?421    Mr. Gonzalez. I do.422    Ms. Stepman. I do.423    Dr. Shires. I do.424    Mr. Gill. Let the record show that the witnesses answered425in the affirmative. Thank you, and you can take a seat.426    We appreciate you being here today and look forward to your427testimony. Let me remind the witnesses that we have read your428written statement, and it will appear in full in the hearing429record. Please limit your oral statements to 5 minutes. As a430reminder, please press the button on the microphone in front of431you so that it is on and the Members can hear you. When you432begin to speak, the light in front of you will turn green.433After 4 minutes, the light will turn yellow. When the red light434comes on, your 5 minutes have expired, and we would ask that435you please wrap it up.436    I now recognize Mr. Mike Gonzalez for his opening437statement.438439                 STATEMENT OF MR. MIKE GONZALEZ440441       ANGELES T. ARREDONDO E PLURIBUS UNUM SENIOR FELLOW442443                    THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION444445    Mr. Gonzalez. Chairman Gill, Ranking Member Simon, Members446of this Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify of447the persistence of diversity, equity, and inclusion programs448across American institutions. My name is Mike Gonzalez. I am a449Senior Fellow at the Heritage Foundation. The views I express450in this testimony are my own.451    Two weeks ago, I spent ten days in three European452countries, starting with five days in the United Kingdom. As I453was able to witness, the country still reeling from the recent454stabbing death of a young man, who died because police shackled455him and allowed him to bleed to death after his accuser--after456his attacker accused him of having been racist. The police have457been trained in antiracist practices, so they sided with the458attacker and suppressed their natural instinct to save a person459bleeding to death. That man was Henry Nowak, and his death was460caused by DEI.461    But, entire societies can become victims of DEI.462    On the Fourth of July, the White House published a463devastating report on the Smithsonian Institution, revealing464how DEI and DEI-type thinking has spread deeply into all our465cultural entities, including our museums. The report reveals466that DEI permeates thousands of exhibits that reframe America,467recasting the founding as a story of pure evil. The National468Museum of American History held more than 400 DEI initiatives469in 2023 alone. One of them included a discussion of a toolkit470that contained a chart that could have been written by Ibram X.471Kendi. It said the ultimate goal is to structurally transform472museums into antiracist multicultural institutions in a473transformed society.474    Which brings us to the question, what is DEI? The initial475stand for things we should want. However, the intention of476these words has been distorted as they now mean the opposite.477Diversity is now an identity-based approach that violates478individual character, enforces intellectual conformity, and479demands quotas in order to attain community proportionalism. As480for equity, it means equality of outcomes, which is a violation481of equality before the law. It sounds like equality, but it now482means its functional opposite, as candidate Kamala Harris483demonstrated in November 2020 when she tweeted, ``There's a big484difference between equality and equity. Equitable treatment485means we all end up in the same place.'' That is not the486American ideal, but it marks this promise written in sand.487    Inclusion, meanwhile, means exactly its opposite--488exclusion. We just saw an example of this when baseball players489for the San Francisco Giants were prevented from wearing490references to Bible verses on their caps. Inclusion is language491codes. DEI is therefore illegal. It transgresses the American492understanding of the promise of equal treatment from which we493must never deviate. DEI is also immoral as it demands that we494treat people differently because of immutable characteristics;495that is, traits they were born into and which they can never496change, such as race, sex, national origin, et cetera. To do so497is recognizably unjust.498    President Biden, or whoever controlled the levers of power499during his years in office, put this anti-American and immoral500insanity on steroids. The DEI regime did not, of course, emerge501with President Biden. DEI trainings go back over many decades,502but it has been over the past 15 years or so that the acronym503has become standardized. DEI trainings are nothing more than504struggle sessions as practiced in China during the Cultural505Revolution. These trainings attempt to indoctrinate Americans506and stop them from viewing their country as worthy of patriotic507love and see it instead as a place so structurally unjust that508it requires systemwide transformation.509    President Trump has tried to reverse this regime through510executive orders (EO) that explicitly targets President Biden's511programs, directs Federal agencies to eliminate DEI initiatives512throughout the Federal Government, and calls for increased513scrutiny of DEI practices in schools and universities that514receive Federal support. Most recently, Office of Management515and Budget (OMB) issued a new rule change that also fights DEI.516Unfortunately, schools and university administrators who remain517intent on continuing to discriminate based on race and sex have518tried to figure out how to defy the President or to at least519game the system. It is up to you to cement President Trump's520actions into legislation.521    Thank you for your attention.522    Mr. Gill. Thank you, Mr. Gonzalez, and thanks for staying523within the time limit.524    I now recognize Inez Feltscher Stepman for her opening525statement.526527            STATEMENT OF MS. INEZ FELTSCHER STEPMAN528529                SENIOR POLICY AND LEGAL ANALYST530531                       INDEPENDENT WOMEN532533    Ms. Stepman. Chairman, Ranking Member, and distinguished534Members of the Task Force, thank you for the opportunity to535testify before you today. I currently serve as Senior Policy536and Legal Analyst with Independent Women and Independent537Women's Law Center. For almost 30 years, Independent Women's538unique methods and trusted brand have shaped public539preferences, policies, and movements to create a better future540for men and women alike. Independent Women's Law Center541supports that mission by advocating for individual liberty,542equal opportunity, and respect for the constitutional order.543Today's subject matter, in my opinion, is critical for all544three of those missions.545    When I came here to testify on this exact issue in 2024, I546identified three major factors barring the promise of547colorblind meritocracy and equality under the law from being548real in the United States. First, the enforcement of549antidiscrimination law in admissions and in the workplace had550become hypersensitive to mere statistical disparities in551outcomes and alleged microaggressions while looking the other552way as universities and companies announced and then followed553up on their intention to actively discriminate in favor of554preferred racial categories and against disfavored ones.555    Second, and related, the legal doctrine of disparate556impact, imagining systemic racism as a kind of ``god of the557gaps'' to be assumed anytime outcomes do not come out perfectly558racially balanced, even in the face of total lack of evidence559of any animus, had become baked into our legal system in a560variety of ways. Disparate impact is, or optimistically was,561the legal enforcement arm of the DEI empire.562    Third, the Biden Administration, building on groundwork563from the previous Obama Administration, redefined the basic564word used in the Civil Rights Act of 1964--sex. Up until that565point, from time immemorial, sex had meant biological sex. And566all of a sudden, under these administrations, it suddenly567included gender identity, so-called, as declared by the568individual. That false definition was illegitimately569substituted and used to transform all of antidiscrimination law570in the United States without a single legislative vote.571    But now we are in 2026, more than a year and a half into572the second Trump Administration. On day one, this President573declared that the Federal Government was actually going to574enforce equality under the law, regardless of whether the575thumbs on the scale benefited Black Americans or White576Americans or anyone else. The promises of the President's577roster of day one EOs have taken some time and I am sure a lot578of hard legal and bureaucratic work across disparate agencies579to come to fruition, but now this ideal, that it is illegal to580use characteristics like race and sex to make important581decisions about people's lives and work, is being shaped in582real time.583    As I sit here before you today, I am pleased to be able to584say that enormous progress on each one of these fronts has been585made. Although anti-White discrimination continues to exist in586ideologically dedicated institutions, as Mike testified, they587resist this kind of enforcement. In no era, in my lifetime,588have more strides been made toward the American ideal of being589judged by merit rather than immutable characteristics. It is a590simple ideal, but rare, and one no less worth fighting for now591that discrimination is against Whites and being laundered under592the gauzy terms of diversity, equity, and inclusion than it was593during the first wave of the civil rights movement, when racial594discrimination was implemented against Blacks.595    As Chief Justice Roberts memorably put it back in 2007,596``The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to597stop discriminating on the basis of race.'' There is no598diversity exception to this just colorblind principle of our599law. No matter our race, Americans should expect to be judged600fairly and on the merits, not on the basis of skin color,601religion, or sex. We can either have civil rights and just602treatment for every American, or we can have a legalized racial603hierarchy system and balkanized resentful politics that puts us604at each other's throats.605    Despite being considered controversial in some of our elite606institutions, this principle is very popular. Americans of all607political stripes, from red Florida to blue California, and608from all backgrounds, agree that we ought to be judged by the609content of our character and what we have to offer on the basis610of merit, whether we seek to offer that merit to an admissions611committee, an employer, or as a contractor working with the612Federal Government. That is why even in my deep blue home state613of California, when voters are presented with the opportunity614to reject racial discrimination for any reason and embrace615colorblind meritocracy, they overwhelmingly choose to do so.616    The Trump Administration is, for the first time in decades,617enforcing the Civil Rights Act and the Constitution equally for618all Americans. But this laudable progress is fragile. Equality619under the law and colorblind meritocracy need codifying from620this body and protection from its highest court. Now, it is up621to Congress and the Supreme Court to make sure that the622principles of colorblind justice and equality under the law,623the only fair system in a multi-ethnic republic, continue to624flourish. Thank you.625    Mr. Gill. Thank you.626    And I now recognize Dr. Michael Shires for his opening627statement.628629             STATEMENT OF DR. MICHAEL SHIRES, PH.D.630631              VICE CHAIR OF EDUCATION OPPORTUNITY,632633          HIGHER EDUCATION, AND SENIOR POLICY OFFICER634635                 AMERICA FIRST POLICY INSTITUTE636637    Dr. Shires. Thank you. Chairman Gill, Ranking Member Simon,638and Members of the Task Force, thank you for the opportunity to639testify today. It is a privilege to be here, and I am grateful640for your leadership and service to our Nation.641    I am honored to testify before you today about diversity,642equity, and inclusion, or DEI policies, and their devastating643impact on one of our most important national treasures,644America's colleges and universities. I am speaking today in my645capacity as the Vice Chair of Education Opportunity and Senior646Policy Officer at the America First Policy Institute (AFPI), a647nonprofit research institute whose focus is putting the648interests of the American people at the forefront of American649public policy.650    I lead our extensive work in higher education, including651our work that shows how DEI undermines the quality of the652education provided to millions of Americans each day. I also653speak as someone who spent nearly 40 years in higher education654policy and leadership, including 25 years as an administrator655and professor at Pepperdine University, and most recently,656three years as the founding chief of staff at the Free Speech657University of Austin.658    A few days ago, we celebrated the 250th anniversary of the659adoption of the Declaration of Independence, the proclamation660that launched America on a path to freedom, opportunity, and661prosperity unrivaled in human history. The central premise of662that declaration is the notion we all know--all men are created663equal. And even though we have not always lived up to that664ideal, pursuing it has fueled American success for the past 250665years.666    Yet today, our leading institutions, including our colleges667and universities, have set aside this principle, instead668advancing a virulent DEI ideology rooted in the belief that the669United States is systemically racist and a White supremacist670project. DEI argues that certain disfavored groups, including671Whites, men, heterosexuals, even political conservatives, are672oppressors who must give up their privilege in favor of those673who are not. Today, this insidious ideology infects nearly674every dimension of the academy, including hiring, promotions,675tenure, admissions, and even academic publishing.676    Over the past four decades, I have watched this contagion677metastasize on campuses. I have sat in university diversity678committee meetings where I was personally scolded by my peers679for the color of my skin. I have been asked to draft loyalty680statements to this ideology in order to apply for jobs and681explicitly told to hire candidates because of their race or682gender and not because of their ability to do the job. I have683seen it devastate careers, and I have seen it close the door of684opportunity to some of our best and brightest students. This685leftist monoculture undermines the very purpose of the American686investment in higher education, to equip the next generation of687Americans to think, debate, and make the best decisions in a688complex world based on evidence, not prejudice.689    Unfortunately, the conversation on most university campuses690is more about indoctrination and advancing this leftism than691promoting shared American values. The leftists who have co-692opted America's institutions tolerate only one perspective on693campus--theirs--undermining the very intellectual diversity694needed for higher education to fulfill its primary public695purpose. Unaligned speakers are canceled, students who disagree696are failed, faculty are intimidated into silence or fired.697Shout-downs, hecklers, vetoes, violence, and even murder are698used to silence dissenting voices.699    The American people collectively rejected this anti-700American discrimination and divisiveness when they elected701President Trump. And he responded, taking bold steps to roll702back the left's DEI stranglehold on higher education by703revoking the previous executive orders that mandated it. He has704aggressively enforced existing laws that ban discrimination in705all forms, including those demanded by DEI. He limited the use706of disparate impact in civil rights law and reformed707accreditation to ensure institutions are transparent and708accountable to the American people who fund them.709    As a result, DEI forces today appear to be in retreat. Do710not be deceived. Many of these discriminatory processes are711still at work, just reformulated or hidden for the moment. AFPI712supports and applauds the Administration's actions to713reinstitute merit and opportunity for all Americans in higher714education, regardless of race, gender, or other715characteristics.716    To persevere, these changes must be codified into law, and717we welcome the opportunity to work with Congress and the718Administration to ensure equal treatment for all Americans of719every background in our colleges and universities, much as our720Founding Fathers would have envisioned 250 years ago.721    Thank you for this opportunity, and I look forward to your722questions.723    Mr. Gill. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Shires, and thank you724to all three of you once again for taking the time to come here725and testify before us.726    We are now going to move on to the question portion of this727hearing, and we are going to kick it off with the great728Governor Byron Donalds to begin. You are now recognized for 5729minutes.730    Mr. Donalds. I appreciate the sentiment, Chairman, about731115 days to go.732    Dr. Shires, thanks so much for being here. I want to pick733up where you left off. In your view, what is the current state734of academia with respect to DEI programs? What is actually735happening in there today?736    Dr. Shires. On most campuses, DEI is still in full force.737You see institutions, for example, that require diversity738statements for application have eliminated that, but yet every739single website that helps you apply for a job has information740on how to circumvent not having it to make sure that they know741that you are aligned with DEI.742    Mr. Donalds. Are we seeing the same issue in some Federal743agencies, even though the Trump Administration obviously has744put out executive orders to unwind DEI practices in Federal745agencies?746    Dr. Shires. Absolutely. It is important to remember that747the universities and the academy are kind of the epicenter for748our professional workforce, and so as students graduate and749have been indoctrinated in this ideology, they carry it with750them into the workplace.751    Mr. Donalds. Well, in these agencies and even in the752universities, what are some of the ways that they are753rebranding DEI to try to basically kind of be in the shadows754away from the eyes of the American people?755    Dr. Shires. The most common one is if you see an Office of756Community Belonging, it is where all the people that were in757the DEI office now are on campus. I am sorry?758    Mr. Donalds. Point of clarification for me, what is759community belonging?760    Dr. Shires. It is what they call DEI offices now. It takes761the inclusion part of DEI--diversity, equity, inclusion--and it762talks about how you empower and enable students in these763protected classes to be on campus and to be engaged, but it is764really the same operation that was there before about dividing765the campus.766    Mr. Donalds. Why don't we just empower them to be in class767and actually learn? Wouldn't that be empowering a student?768    Dr. Shires. I believe it would be, yes.769    Mr. Donalds. Let me ask you this question because I have770never heard of this classification. Say that--community?771    Dr. Shires. Community belonging.772    Mr. Donalds. Community belonging. Okay. I have never heard773this term before, but that is okay. That is why we are having774this hearing.775    If this is what colleges and institutions are moving toward776to shield or to rebrand DEI, what are some metrics or some777planks that policymakers need to be looking out for so that,778while we continue to move toward a true colorblind society779based upon merit, that we are examining what is happening at780institutions of higher learning who still want to hold on to781DEI programs by this name of community belonging? What should782we be looking for?783    Dr. Shires. Much we should be doing is enforcing existing784law. I mean, current laws against discrimination prevent785universities from treating students differently, and yet on786many campuses we now have separate graduations. Imagine if we787would have had a graduation for White students only, for788example, what the uproar would be, and yet on many campuses we789have ethnically based graduations.790    And so, we want to look at enforcing current discrimination791law. I think the civil rights focus for so long has been on792opening the door to opportunity, and we have allowed this793engine to build overt discrimination through DEI.794    Mr. Donalds. Well, thank you for that.795    Ms. Stepman, your testimony was actually quite interesting.796Quick question, what are some of the--have you been studying or797looking at what some of the current practices in corporate798America are around DEI? Is it something that corporate America799is largely stepping away from, or are they trying to rebrand800similar to what is happening on university campuses?801    Ms. Stepman. I think corporate America is, for better or802worse, is a much less ideological environment than the803university campuses. I would expect universities to fight this804tooth and nail for ideological reasons. I have been much more805encouraged. I think if you would have asked me that question806just a couple years ago, I would have given you a more807pessimistic answer. I have been pretty positively encouraged by808the response of corporate America here, although they are809definitely trying their best to hide and memory-hole all of the810things they said in 2020 and 2021. Fortunately, we have records811of those statements, both external and internal, and those will812be used for litigation. But I do think that they are backing813off of some of these commitments. We will see whether that814commitment--new commitment to meritocracy, is maintained once815this Administration leaves power.816    Mr. Donalds. Okay. Interesting. Thank you for that.817    Mr. Gonzalez, do we have a reliable estimate on the818cumulative taxpayer dollars spent across the Federal819bureaucracy on DEI, personnel, contracts, and training programs820over the last five years?821    Mr. Gonzalez. I am sure that exists. I do not have it, but822I can get it and forward it to your office.823    Mr. Donalds. I look forward to seeing that.824    Listen, I want to thank you all for taking the time to825come.826    Chairman, thank you for leading this effort to make sure827that the United States is focused on true merit between all828people, regardless of race. I think that is going to be829critical to the future of the United States.830    And I yield back.831    Mr. Gill. Thank you.832    And I now recognize Mr. Walkinshaw from Virginia for 5833minutes.834    Mr. Walkinshaw. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.835    General C.Q. Brown, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff836and the former Chief of Staff of the Air Force, a fighter837pilot, commander of all Air Force operations in the Indo-838Pacific, recipient of the Defense Distinguished Service Medal,839the Air Force Distinguished Service Medal, and a Bronze Star,840among others--fired, not for cause, not because he lacked the841experience or the qualifications to lead. Rather, he was fired842by President Trump amid an ideologically motivated purge of843military leaders after, by the way, Secretary Hegseth suggested844that he got his job due to race, kind of ironic from someone845who got his job based on being a cable news celebrity.846    Admiral Lisa Franchetti, Chief of Naval Operations, a847former surface warfare officer, former Commander of U.S. Naval848Forces Korea, Deputy Commander of U.S. Naval Forces Europe and849U.S. Naval Forces Africa during the 2018 strikes against Syrian850chemical weapon facilities, again, fired without cause.851    My colleagues here today want to spin a false narrative.852They want to claim that diversity efforts are at odds with853merit-based policies, but these firings did nothing to bring or854restore merit to our Armed Forces. President Trump's policies855are removing the best of the best from positions of power, not856because they lack qualifications or experience, but because857this Administration is hostile to seasoned leaders whose views858differ from theirs, perhaps, and whose backgrounds do not fit859their specific stereotypes. And when this plays out in the860institution of our Armed Forces, readiness suffers.861    But do not take my word for it. In the words of Admiral862McRaven, the four-star who oversaw the raid that killed bin863Laden, there is ``no doubt that General Brown and Admiral864Franchetti were warfighters committed to the cause through and865through.''866    If President Trump and my Republican colleagues and our867witnesses here today want to talk about advancement based on868merit, they owe the American people an explanation for869dismissing two--and I am just talking about two here today--870exceptionally qualified military leaders, while the President871is starting wars of choice across the globe.872    In the words of General Stanley McChrystal, the four-star873who oversaw the Joint Special Operations Command during the874Iraq War, ``These efforts are a complete distraction, a waste875of time, and in fact run counter to the concept of a876meritocracy.'' What they are really about, as General877McChrystal observes, is ``making the U.S. military an exclusive878organization that only values service from people of a certain879gender and of a certain race.'' Admiral McRaven goes on.880``These recent firings raise a risk that senior officers will881be overly cautious about providing their best advice, and882therefore, the risk of military miscalculation''--and, wow,883have we had some miscalculations lately--``will grow884dramatically.''885    So, let us call it what it is, efforts to exclude qualified886women and people of color from positions of power. They are not887doing away with DEI. They are just doing racism and sexism, and888the American people will suffer as a result.889    Ms. Feltscher Stepman, you expressed concern that this890Administration's ``new commitment to meritocracy'' might be891lost in a future administration. Do you agree or disagree with892Admiral McRaven, General McChrystal, that these firings had893nothing to do with merit?894    Ms. Stepman. No, I have no way of doing that, but there are895only several basis on which it is illegal and unconstitutional896to fire someone, and that is the purpose of the hearing today,897right, is to talk about those specific things.898    Mr. Walkinshaw. Do you think these were merit--were these899merit-based firings?900    Ms. Stepman. I--the question has to have----901    Mr. Walkinshaw. Is there any evidence to suggest they were?902    Ms. Stepman. The President--we elect a President, not903generals, right? So, he has to have the legitimacy to choose904the people----905    Mr. Walkinshaw. Should he fire them based on merit?906    Ms. Stepman. I--he can make any decision he wants for the907people who are working under him because the American people908elected him. Except on these----909    Mr. Walkinshaw. Maybe your organization should look into910these firings and see whether they were merit-based or race-911based or sex-based. Will you do that?912    Ms. Stepman. If they were race-based or sex-based, they913would be illegal.914    Mr. Walkinshaw. Why don't you look into them?915    Ms. Stepman. I do not see any evidence of that.916    Mr. Walkinshaw. Why don't you do a report on that?917    Ms. Stepman. I do not see any evidence of the fact that it918was race-based or sex-based----919    Mr. Walkinshaw. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.920    Ms. Stepman [continuing]. And those are the only ways----921    Mr. Walkinshaw. I yield back.922    Ms. Stepman [continuing]. That is illegal to fire someone.923The President can fire somebody for disagreeing with him, for924sure.925    Mr. Walkinshaw. Mr. Chairman, my time has expired. I yield926back.927    Mr. Gill. Thank you.928    And I will now recognize myself for 5 minutes for the929purpose of asking questions.930    Dr. Shires, what is DEI?931    Dr. Shires. Diversity, equity, and inclusion, as my932colleague Mr. Gonzalez said earlier, is none of those three933things. It is an ideology that is based on a philosophy--it934comes out of the academic world. It is based on a philosophy935that society is driven by--we are driven by our environment and936our identity, and the world that we live in is constructed from937it. As a result of that, we are victims of the world around us,938essentially, and in that world, they divide people into939oppressors and the oppressed, in the Marxist tradition, to940leverage power.941    Mr. Gill. Are DEI policies compatible with meritocracy?942    Dr. Shires. They are not.943    Mr. Gill. Could you elaborate?944    Dr. Shires. Meritocracy is based on the idea that you945measure somebody based on what they are doing, not what they946look like. DEI policies actually call for equal outcomes for947everyone, and so if I perform at a different level than someone948else, they are automatically placed in that same level.949    Mr. Gill. What do DEI policies mean in practice?950    Dr. Shires. In practice, it means quotas. It means that----951    Mr. Gill. Racial quotas.952    Dr. Shires. It does. And just like the Congressman953mentioned, you know, the perception that people are promoted to954ranks without the adequate backgrounds, whether that is955legitimate or not. In this case, I do not think it is, but that956is the perception that arises because you simply assign people957status based on who they are and not what they have done.958    Mr. Gill. Ms. Stepman, racial quotas seem un-American to959me, don't they to you?960    Ms. Stepman. Yes, and they are illegal.961    Mr. Gill. And they are illegal. Under DEI regimes, what962races do colleges and universities typically least prefer in963their admissions processes?964    Ms. Stepman. Whites, men, Asians. Men is not a race,965obviously, but there actually might be some--a little bit of966reverse discrimination actually going against women now because967women so predominate in universities, but yes, Whites and968Asians primarily.969    Mr. Gill. Why do you think that it is primarily those970groups?971    Ms. Stepman. Because they are in a war with the reality of972these disparities, so if you want to have a quota that comes973out perfectly racially balanced at the end, the only way that974these universities have been able to achieve that is by975discriminating on the basis of race and sex in their976admissions.977    Mr. Gill. And you mentioned that a lot of colleges and978universities, you expect to fight DEI restrictions. Why is979that? You said that there was an ideological component there.980    Ms. Stepman. Right, I think my fellow witness correctly981referenced the idea of the oppressor and the oppressed. There982is this idea that all differences in culture, disparities,983outcomes, all of these are somehow immediately evidence of984discrimination and some kind of unjust system, and so if there985is an ideological commitment to make sure that they kind of986force the world to look the way that they think it ought to,987and unfortunately, that is both immoral, discriminatory, and988fortunately for us, it is illegal under the law of the United989States.990    Mr. Gill. Could you walk us through, practically speaking,991what a DEI policy would mean for a college admissions process?992    Ms. Stepman. It means that, in practice, they place a thumb993on the scale for applications that may have no more or in fact994lesser qualifications than other applications purely on the995basis of race. And by the way, we saw this in the data in996Students for Fair Admissions. Harvard was absolutely997discriminating against Asian and White applicants who are998comparably situated to other applicants, and we know that999universities have been doing this for decades.1000    Mr. Gill. Mr. Gonzalez, BlackRock has a scholarship1001exclusively for a diverse student. Those are their words. What1002do you think ``diverse'' means in that context?1003    Mr. Gonzalez. Yes, that is--actually, diversity should mean1004that you have people of diverse backgrounds. Often enough,1005diverse means members of any of the so-called marginalized1006groups alone, without any participation by Asian Americans or1007White Americans.1008    Mr. Gill. That seems discriminatory, does it not?1009    Mr. Gonzalez. And as Ms. Feltscher said, it is not just1010discriminatory, it is also illegal and immoral.1011    Mr. Gill. We see this across the corporate world. Starbucks1012has a training program for employees limited to ``Black,1013indigenous, and peoples of color, BIPOC, partners.'' Do you1014think that is discriminatory?1015    Mr. Gonzalez. And illegal. I think the corporate world--I1016agree with Ms. Feltscher. I think the corporate world is in1017fact trying to move away. I have heard many anecdotes of----1018    Mr. Gill. Their goal at the time was for BIPOC1019representation to be at least 30 percent at all corporate1020levels and at least 40 percent at all retail and manufacturing1021roles by----1022    Mr. Gonzalez. Right.1023    Mr. Gill [continuing]. 2025. That sounds like a racial1024quota.1025    Mr. Gonzalez. That is a quota, that is illegal, that is1026immoral. However, since President Trump was elected, they are1027actually coming forward and saying, hey, we are so glad you are1028making this illegal, you are discouraging us from doing this.1029We did not want to do it in the first place. And so, I agree1030with Ms. Feltscher that the corporate world is moving at a much1031faster rate than the academy.1032    Mr. Gill. Thank you, and my time is up, so thank you all.1033    And I would now----1034    Mr. Walkinshaw. Mr. Chairman, a UC request?1035    Mr. Gill. Yep, without objection.1036    Mr. Walkinshaw. I ask unanimous consent to enter into the1037record a February 21, 2025, article from Military Times titled,1038``Ending Military Diversity Efforts Will Cost Us Talent and1039Readiness,'' which shows active-duty service members believe1040dismantling programs is undermining military readiness and1041recruitment of diverse talent.1042    Mr. Gill. Without objection.1043    Mr. Walkinshaw. I ask unanimous consent to enter into the1044record a March 27, 2026, article from NPR titled, ``Defense1045Secretary Hegseth Intervened to Stop Promotions of Black and1046Female Officers.''1047    Mr. Gill. Without objection.1048    Mr. Walkinshaw. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1049    Mr. Gill. I would like to enter into the record an article1050from The Hill called ``Asian American Students Were Victims of1051Racial Discrimination,'' as well as another article called1052``The Left's Incurable DEI Addiction.''1053    And with that said, I will now recognize Ms. Pressley from1054Massachusetts for 5 minutes.1055    Ms. Pressley. Thank you.1056    Today's hearing is irrational. Today's hearing is1057irrational, it is misguided, and it is consistent, consistent1058with the Republicans war on diversity, equity, and on1059inclusion. Now, Republicans control the White House, they have1060rigged the Supreme Court, they have majorities in both chambers1061of Congress, and they are using the full weight of that power,1062the full force of that, and your taxpayer dollars might I add,1063of this Federal Government in this moment to enact precise harm1064on working families.1065    There are no oversight hearings on high unemployment and1066the rising costs, and there are no hearings on protecting1067voting rights or affordable healthcare coverage. Instead,1068Republicans have decided to focus on attacking everyday people1069who are just trying to make ends meet. Their agenda is anti-1070Black, it is anti-immigrant, it is anti-lesbian, gay, bisexual,1071transgender, queer/questioning (LGBTQ), it is anti-worker. And1072again, since we are talking about diversity, equity, inclusion,1073and accessibility (DEIA) and the dismantling of it, it is also1074anti-veteran, it is anti-rural, it is anti-disabled, and it1075most certainly is anti-woman.1076    Diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives were created1077to promote fairness because there are real biases in America1078that disadvantage specific groups of people. That is a fact1079backed by mountains of data. While there has been progress, the1080work is unfinished. Actually, the work is piling up due to1081Republicans emboldening greater discrimination, while1082simultaneously dismantling civil rights protections. For1083example, women face systemic gender discrimination. I know you1084cannot tell by looking at the Republican Party, but women make1085up 50 percent of this country, and we deserve equal rights.1086    So, I am going to start with a simple question, and Ms.1087Feltscher Stepman, I am going to begin with you, because1088actually the fact that your women's forum even exists, some1089might even consider that to be a DEI initiative. But, let me1090just ask you a question. Do you believe America should have1091gender equality, meaning that women and men should have equal1092rights under the Constitution and our laws? Yes or no?1093    Ms. Stepman. I believe that women and men----1094    Ms. Pressley. Yes or no?1095    Ms. Stepman [continuing]. Can and do have equal rights----1096    Ms. Pressley. Yes or no?1097    Ms. Stepman [continuing]. Under the Constitution, yes.1098    Ms. Pressley. Yes or no? One more time to keep it clean1099here. Do you believe America should have gender equality,1100meaning that women and men should have equal rights under the1101Constitution and our laws? Yes or no?1102    Ms. Stepman. I believe they should have equal rights, yes.1103    Ms. Pressley. Okay. And Dr. Shires, yes or no?1104    Dr. Shires. Yes.1105    Ms. Pressley. Mr. Gonzalez, yes or no?1106    Mr. Gonzalez. Yes.1107    Ms. Pressley. All right. Well, unfortunately, the1108Constitution is silent on this topic, and that is why I have1109introduced legislation to add the Equal Rights Amendment as the111028th Amendment, enshrining it as the law of this land. Now,1111look you all, every Democrat in the House has signed on to my1112bill, but I am still waiting on my Republican colleagues to1113join. So, until we are able to codify gender equality in the1114Constitution, diversity, equity, and inclusion policies have1115supported women in every aspect of their lives.1116    For example, women have served in the military for more1117than 200 years, yet Republicans and your anti-diversity1118campaign have denied multiple women promotions just because1119they are women, not to mention those that have just been fired.1120Women get paid less money for doing the same work as men, but1121since Republicans are anti-equity, the EEOC, Equal Employment1122Opportunity Commission, has weakened enforcement of pay1123discrimination laws, maintaining and widening our gender wage1124gap by the day. Do you all have any daughters? Not to mention1125Black women making 65 cents on the dollar to White men.1126    And finally, women are underrepresented in medical trials1127to find cures for diseases that affect us, but because1128Republicans are attacking inclusion, they cut funding for1129women's health research projects.1130    So, let me sum it up. Anti-DEI is anti-woman, and those1131harms are compounded by attacks on voting rights, like the so-1132called Save America Act that Republicans are fixated on1133passing, which could disenfranchise nearly 70 million women1134simply because their last names on their ID no longer match1135their birth certificates after being married, which pro-family1136people seem to care about. Not to mention the attacks on bodily1137autonomy. As women, our bodies are treated as a debate, and1138Republicans are passing laws that restrict what we do and when1139we do it, something men have never had to struggle with.1140    So, when it comes to Republicans on this Committee who are1141all men, enacting more harm on women through anti-DEI hearings1142like this one, we need to call it out and fight back.1143    Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record1144this June 2026 article from AfroTech titled ``Civil Rights1145Organizations and Nonprofits Signed Letter Demanding1146Transparency and Response From the Trump Administration1147Regarding DEIA Ban.''1148    Mr. Gill. Without objection.1149    Ms. Pressley. So, you all, since Donald Trump is so loud1150and proud about these efforts to dismantle and defund DEIA, why1151do you think the Trump Administration is hiding all the data on1152their firings?1153    Okay. I guess that is my time. All right then. Thank you.1154    Mr. Gill. Thank you. The gentlewoman's time has expired.1155Thank you, Congresswoman. And I would be happy to look at your1156equal rights amendment and read through it. I guess my biggest1157question was, does it define what a woman is?1158    Ms. Pressley. I look forward to your signing on.1159    Mr. Gill. We will take a look at it.1160    Ms. Pressley. I look forward to your signing on.1161    Mr. Gill. I just was hoping for some analytical clarity,1162but thank you. We will take a look at it.1163    And I have got some UCs as well. ``DEI Has Jeopardized Air1164Safety,'' ``DEI Policies Threaten Medical Excellence,''1165``Uncovering Radical Efforts to Disguise DEI,'' ``Justice1166Department Investigation Determines UCLA's Medical School1167Discrimination Based on Race and Admissions.''1168    And with that said----1169    Ms. Simon. I have a UC request----1170    Mr. Gill. Yep.1171    Ms. Simon [continuing]. Mr. Chairman. Thank you. I ask1172unanimous consent to enter into the record, January 26, 2025,1173an article from CNN entitled ``Trump Gutting of Federal DEI1174Programs Will Hit Rural Poor Communities,'' which shows to1175push----1176    Mr. Gill. Without objection.1177    Ms. Simon. Okay. It is right here.1178    Mr. Gill. I will now recognize Mr. Menefee for 5 minutes1179for the purpose of asking questions.1180    Mr. Menefee. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.1181    Good morning. You know, we have heard a lot today about you1182all's views on diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. You1183know, my take is these are about leveling out a playing field1184that has historically not been level where there are folks in1185this country who are all running the same race, but for some1186people, their lane has obstacles in it. It has hurdles, it has1187water pits, and that is because of discrimination that was1188pushed, instituted, and facilitated by government at every1189single level.1190    So, I want to start with you, Dr. Shires. You have written1191much about how DEI programs fuel racial stereotypes. You talked1192here a little bit today about your opposition to these1193programs, and I think that is consistent with what we have1194heard from our Republican colleagues, as well as Vice President1195Vance, who I believe called them a deliberate program of1196discrimination against White men.1197    So, let me ask you this. Take a random White person in1198America today and a random Black person. When they go apply for1199jobs, when they apply for a home loan, when they are getting1200their home appraised, when they are seeking higher wages, would1201you say that those two people are more likely than not to be on1202the same playing field?1203    Dr. Shires. Legally, yes.1204    Mr. Menefee. I have no clue what that means. In practice,1205are they likely to be on the same playing field?1206    Dr. Shires. I guess what I am trying to understand is, what1207playing field are you comparing them on? I mean, in your1208metaphor, you talk about how some lanes on the track have1209obstacles and others do not. The solution to that is to remove1210the obstacles. It is not to change the finish line. And DEI1211changes the finish line, whereas the Federal laws against the1212discrimination are there to remove the obstacles.1213    So, if you are asking--if the question is, how do I get to1214the situation where both of them have the same access, the1215answer is removing the obstacles and enforcing the law. It is1216not changing the finish line.1217    Mr. Menefee. Well, there are also DEI programs that remove1218the obstacles that the President has removed from the Federal1219Government. But my question to you is, if a random White person1220in this country and a random Black person in this country go to1221get their home appraised, right, why is it that the Black1222person is much more likely to get a lower value on their home1223appraisal?1224    Dr. Shires. Because they live in a different neighborhood?1225    Mr. Menefee. Okay. Great. We will get to that in a second1226because that is wrong. Black people in this country were1227enslaved for at least 240 years. Is that correct?1228    Dr. Shires. That is correct.1229    Mr. Menefee. Okay. And after slavery ended, you had about1230100 more years at least of Jim Crow and legal segregation where1231government at the Federal, state, and local level blocked Black1232people from owning land, from getting bank loans, from living1233in certain neighborhoods, from attending certain schools. All1234that happened too, right?1235    Dr. Shires. Yes.1236    Mr. Menefee. Okay. So, my question to you is simple. Name1237the year that the playing field became completely even. I want1238you to give me a date.1239    Dr. Shires. Again, it depends on what playing field you are1240talking about. I mean, if you are looking at----1241    Mr. Menefee. For home loans, you brought--I think we talked1242about home loans and appraisals. For home loans, what year did1243it become equal?1244    Dr. Shires. Well, according to the DEI movement, in 1991,1245when they imposed disparate impact.1246    Mr. Menefee. So, you are telling me today that if a Black1247person goes and applies for a home loan, they have the same1248likelihood of getting accepted for that loan as a White person1249does?1250    Dr. Shires. I am saying under the DEI rules, yes, that1251would be the case. We know in practicality that people have1252different income profiles and experiences. If you are asking me1253a person that lives next door to another person, if one is1254White and one is Black and they go both apply for a loan, do I1255expect different outcomes? No, and if there are, then it should1256be enforced under discrimination laws.1257    Mr. Menefee. So, you are talking about rules, I am talking1258about outcomes. So, let us play a game of true and false, and1259let us start with wealth disparities. The median net worth of a1260White household in this country is $285,000. The median net1261worth of a Black household is about $45,000. True or false?1262    Dr. Shires. I do not know.1263    Mr. Menefee. Okay. You came here as an expert today in a1264DEI hearing, and you do not know that, basic facts about wealth1265accumulation in this country? All right. Let us go to the next1266one. For every $100 in wealth held by White families, Black1267families hold about $15. True or false?1268    Dr. Shires. Again, I do not know those specific numbers.1269    Mr. Menefee. Okay. Well, I have data here, it is true. So,1270we know that the answer here is not just that Black people1271believe in saving less than White people do, right? It is that1272government in this country has put one set of folks in a better1273position to succeed than other people. And it was the law for a1274very, very long time, and it became ingrained in our1275institutions. Government was part of the problem, and so it has1276to now be part of the solution.1277    So, let us do this true or false game again for employment1278and wages. Black workers are far more likely to be unemployed1279as White workers at almost every education level. True or1280false?1281    Dr. Shires. That is true.1282    Mr. Menefee. So, do you just believe that Black people are1283lazier or are not as good at applications? Why do you think1284that data is the way it is?1285    Dr. Shires. I think the data is that way it is because our1286educational system has dramatically failed the Black community,1287and instead of solving it, we just let them into college where1288they then have a higher rate of failure because they----1289    Mr. Menefee. I was not aware that there is a Black1290education system and a White education system.1291    Dr. Shires. I said our education.1292    Mr. Menefee. In my district, we have schools that are1293represented, all races in there, in the same outcomes. The same1294school has different outcomes for Black kids and White kids.1295    My time is up, but in short, if the government was part of1296the problem, the government now has to be part of the solution.1297    Mr. Gill. The gentleman's time has expired. Thank you.1298    And I now recognize Mr. Jack for 5 minutes.1299    Mr. Jack. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.1300    And before I begin, I would like to acknowledge my friend1301John Bonk and his wife, Laura, who are in the audience with us1302today. I wanted them to see a committee hearing, and I wanted1303them to see, Mr. Chairman, what a freshman can do when they1304excel in this Committee, as you no doubt are exemplary proof.1305When you are a great freshman, you have a chance to lead in1306Congress and get a gavel, and that is exactly what you have1307proven.1308    So, today, Mr. Gonzalez, I would like to start with you. I1309would like to learn a little bit more about the history of DEI1310and some of the initiatives we have seen in the corporate1311workplace. Could you help us understand from where this1312emanated and who developed these initial ideas to implement1313these policies?1314    Mr. Gonzalez. Representative Jack, thank you for your1315question. So, they have been around for many years. Initially,1316they were a response to the Civil Rights Act. They wanted, you1317know, throughout the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, they wanted to1318make sure that companies were doing the things that the1319government demanded, first of contractors, government1320contractors, then of just any business.1321    Very quickly, these degenerated into practices and1322trainings that were part of a larger framework that saw America1323as being basically racist, and that is when--especially since1324in the last 15 years when the acronym has become more defined,1325they began to look a lot more like the struggle sessions as1326practiced in the Cultural Revolution in China, which were meant1327to change the thinking of a whole society.1328    Mr. Jack. And I am just curious, over those past 15 years,1329I mean, what has really precipitated the acceleration of this?1330It seems like it is commonplace now and something that we are1331trying to identify, we are having a congressional hearing on it1332today. Is there funding that is going toward this? Are there1333groups that are trying to sow division and discord vis-a-vis1334this initiative?1335    Mr. Gonzalez. Yes, you can see a lot of studies have been1336made on the use by newspapers and the academy of the terms of1337DEI, Whiteness, systemic racism, et cetera, and they really1338spike--and they begin to really spike in 2014. And I have1339associated that with the beginning of the Black Lives Matter1340movement in 2013, the second, in June 2013, and then the1341Ferguson riots in 2014 when we really began to--the country1342began to change enormously, and that obviously culminated in13432020, which is when really old, you know, diversity trainers1344were brought here to Congress. Robin DiAngelo met with members1345of one party, nearly all of the members of one party and gave a1346training session. But, so that--so you had two spikes, 2014,1347and then a huge spike in 2020.1348    Mr. Jack. Thank you very much for your testimony.1349    Dr. Shires, I would like to talk a little bit about what1350the Trump Administration has accomplished with respect to1351shutting down DEI policies at over 300 colleges and1352universities, but it seems like some of these academic1353institutions are just changing the name or trying to rebrand1354the effort to comply with some of the executive orders. Could1355you expound on that for us?1356    Dr. Shires. Absolutely. It is important to remember that1357the Students for Fair Admissions ruling came down during the1358Biden Administration, and the Biden Administration did1359effectively nothing to implement the idea that we were supposed1360to have colorblind admissions in universities. And so, the1361Trump Administration has been open and transparent. It shined1362the light of sunshine, if you will, on the actions of these1363institutions. We see the lawsuits with the Department of1364Justice against the medical schools right now, the engagement1365with the ABA. It is literally just raising the conversation to1366say this discrimination is happening, and we need to stop.1367    And so, the main actions have actually been these1368negotiations with high-profile institutions. The Administration1369offered a compact to talk about creating transparency around1370these issues. I was part of the accreditation rulemaking where1371they added complying with civil rights laws as part of the1372responsibilities of accreditors to ensure that universities1373respond to Federal law. So, it is kind of a full-court press.1374    Most recently, the Administration issued new guidance on1375disparate impact rules and how they are used. And again, this1376is Department of Justice guidance. It still has not been tested1377in the courts yet.1378    Mr. Jack. And in our closing 30 seconds, what more could1379Congress do to help accelerate and codify some of these actions1380that the Trump Administration has led on?1381    Dr. Shires. Well, I think the first is to codify the1382disparate impact changes, and I know Chairman Gill has a bill1383on this that would touch those issues. I think beyond that, it1384is a lot about transparency, and it is about enforcement. I1385think Congress should revisit the Higher Education Act and take1386some of the issues around civil rights and the public interest1387in higher education, for example, having intellectual diversity1388on campus as a key dimension to why the government funds higher1389education, and those should be codified in the Higher Ed Act. I1390think that continued conversations and rulings around--or1391hearings around these issues as well.1392    Mr. Jack. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.1393    Ms. Simon. Mr. Chairman, I have a UC request.1394    Mr. Jack. Go ahead.1395    Ms. Simon. Thank you, sir. I ask unanimous consent to enter1396into the record an article from Time Magazine, February 25,13972025, ``How Trump's Attacks on DEI are Hurting Communities That1398Voted for Him,'' which describes how his initiatives----1399    Mr. Gill. Without objection.1400    Ms. Simon [continuing]. Have hurt programs in West1401Virginia.1402    Mr. Gill. Without objection.1403    Ms. Simon. Thank you, sir.1404    Mr. Gill. I now recognize Mr. Min for 5 minutes.1405    Mr. Min. Thank you, Chair Gill, Ranking Member Simon, for1406hosting this hearing.1407    I just want to note, again, this is a Task Force not only1408created to defend constitutional rights and expose1409institutional abuses. I am still waiting on the hearings on,1410say, the constitutional rights protecting people against1411illegal search and seizure, from political motivated1412prosecutions; or on Article I, and its clear edicts that1413Congress and only Congress can declare war, appropriate funds,1414or levy taxes, but I guess we will keep waiting for those1415hearings.1416    Now, before getting into politics, I was a law professor.1417My research focused on banking and corporate governance. I1418actually served on the admissions committee for two years, so I1419have some insights on diversity and inclusion here. And I think1420people often falsely frame diversity and merit as competing1421concepts, and that is not typically the case. This is about1422expanding opportunities, about leveling the playing field.1423    And as someone who was on the admissions committee before1424the Harvard case, where the Supreme Court overturned and1425nullified affirmative action, but post-Bakke, which you are all1426familiar with, where we were allowed to use race as a factor,1427we used it as a factor. It could not be dispositive. There were1428no quotas. And I also know there was a lot of misinformation1429about what diversity, equity, and inclusion actually looked1430like, say, in higher ed. I know that was also the case in1431workplaces, in government hiring practices, and the like. We1432were allowed to use it as a factor.1433    Now, one thing I will just point out, is that we actually1434much more explicitly used ideological diversity as a proxy1435because we wanted to have a diverse institution. We did not1436want to have all liberal students, so we actually pushed up a1437lot of students that probably would not have qualified because1438they were outspoken conservatives, and I just want to make that1439point that I think a lot of folks in this room have problems1440with diversity unless it includes, say, their viewpoints. And1441their viewpoints, let us be honest, for a long time were1442underrepresented in higher education institutions, in the1443workplace because, by pure numbers, people who are outspoken1444conservatives were not typically measuring up and getting into1445places like Harvard or Yale, so they had to adjust and try to1446get people in.1447    I will also note that the research is pretty clear that1448diversity is associated with better outcomes, whether that is1449in the workplace, whether that is in decisionmaking, in1450academic institutions, whether that is in research, and1451certainly in the boardroom, which is what I am familiar with.1452And you are probably all familiar with the litany of research1453out there that not just suggests, but very clearly shows a1454correlation between diversity in boards, corporate boards, and1455Return on Investment (ROI).1456    And so, the McKinsey study is one example of the many, many1457studies out there. I think McKinsey found that on average,1458firms in the top quartile, top 25 percent of diversity on their1459corporate boards, were 27 percent higher ROI than their1460counterparts. That is typical of the findings we have. And the1461reason it is for, it is not just theoretical, it is because we1462have a lot of outcomes associated when you do not have1463diversity. You have groupthink. You have echo chambers. These1464have all been well-documented. You have the problem of yes-men.1465    I just want to highlight something that I think is a very1466clear example of this today. Pete Hegseth, Secretary of1467Defense, is probably the most notorious example of someone who1468has tried to get rid of diversity in the name of pursuing, I do1469not know, something that looks more like him, people that look1470like him, that talk like him. He has notably, apparently, fired1471or prevented the promotion of a number of African Americans and1472women. And yet I think by all accounts, what we have seen to1473date in less than two years is an absolutely disastrous1474Department of Defense. We have a Secretary of Defense that is1475more concerned about facial hair than constitutional1476violations. There appeared to be no exit plan, no strategy when1477he went into Iran. This is the problem when you have group1478think, and you are just trying to promote people that look like1479you. You create that echo chamber, and I think this is a very1480clear example.1481    I will also just note that across the board in my district1482in Orange County, which is one of the most diverse places in1483the country, where we have one of the most booming economies in1484the country--I invite you all to come visit. You can see it is1485really great when you can go get boba or an In-N-Out burger in1486the same day, like, across the street from each other, a lot of1487great outcomes associated with the diversity that is being so1488vilified here. And Orange County, I think, benefits from that1489diversity in our institutions, among our entrepreneurs, among1490our elected officials.1491    And the problem right now that we are seeing is, as1492diversity is being stripped out of so many agencies across the1493board at the Federal level, I have heard from just so many of1494my different stakeholders, whether it is pharmaceutical1495companies, whether it is construction companies, that they have1496difficulty now because the expertise that was in place at1497agencies like the FDA, USDA, whatever else they are dealing1498with, no longer there because in an effort to strip out1499diversity, the Trump Administration has stripped out expertise.1500    Now, with that, I do not really have any questions for you1501because I think we have heard your comments. I just want to1502close by saying diversity matters. It is the heart of this1503country. It is what has made America so great to begin with. As1504a son of immigrants, I will say that proudly. I believe that1505the reason our military, our institutions are so much more1506powerful and effective and lethal than any other countries in1507the world that do not have that diversity is because that1508diversity gives us strength.1509    And with that, I yield back.1510    Mr. Jack. Mr. Chairman?1511    Mr. Gill. You are recognized.1512    Mr. Jack. I have a unanimous consent request.1513    Mr. Gill. Without objection.1514    Mr. Jack. Mr. Chairman, I would like to enter into the1515record three items. First, I would like to enter into the1516record, from the U.S. Department of Education, a press release1517entitled ``U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil1518Rights Launches Title VI Investigation into Fairfax County1519Public Schools.''1520    Mr. Gill. Without objection.1521    Mr. Jack. I would like to enter into the record an article1522from Fox News, ``Watchdog Urges DOJ Probe of Top Research1523University Over Alleged Illegal DEI Practices Defies Common1524Sense.''1525    Mr. Gill. Without objection.1526    Mr. Jack. And last, I would like to enter into the record1527an article from America First Legal, which is ``CMS Removes1528Biden-Era DEI Framework From Kidney Transplant Program1529Following America First Legal's Rulemaking Petition.''1530    Mr. Gill. Without objection.1531    Mr. Min. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to enter into1532the record a May 8, 2025, article from CNN, which describes how1533the Trump Administration's anti-DEI push has gutted critical1534medical research.1535    Mr. Gill. Without objection.1536    Mr. Min. It is titled ``Trump's Diversity Purge Freezes1537Hundreds of Millions in Medical Research at Universities Across1538the Country.''1539    Mr. Gill. Without objection.1540    Mr. Menefee. Mr. Chairman, I have a unanimous consent1541request. I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a1542March 12, 2025, article from The Real Deal titled ``DOGE1543Cancels Affordable Housing Deals in Anti-DEI Push.''1544    Mr. Gill. Without objection.1545    Mr. Menefee. And, second, a December 5, 2022, research1546article from the Brookings Institute, ``How Racial Bias in1547Appraisals Affects the Devaluation of Homes in Majority Black1548Neighborhoods.''1549    Mr. Gill. Without objection.1550    Mr. Menefee. Thank you.1551    Mr. Gill. I now recognize Ms. Simon for her 5 minutes.1552    Ms. Simon. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman.1553    I really appreciate us having this conversation today1554because what we are lifting up is it seems like a lot of anger1555and frustration with the way that things are in this moment.1556And I would agree the American people all over the country,1557from sea to shining sea, they are angry and frustrated and1558afraid as they see the cost of living skyrocket under the1559Administration. Prices are up, and families across the country1560are struggling to make ends meet. We all know if you go to the1561grocery store right now, the price of ground beef or orange1562juice. We are talking about DEI, but I have a couple of1563questions as it relates to what is actually germane to most1564folks in this country in this moment.1565    Mr. Gonzalez, the Bureau of Labor Statistics has found that1566the price of everyday goods like food and housing and clothes1567has increased more than four percent over the last--more than1568four percent over the last 12 months. Mr. Gonzalez, yes or no,1569is DEI the reason that Americans cannot afford clothes or1570groceries?1571    Mr. Gonzalez. No. I believe Biden was.1572    Ms. Simon. Okay. No, I am asking you right now. Is DEI--1573groceries, is DEI----1574    Mr. Gonzalez. You know, I do not think that DEI has1575anything to do with it. I think President----1576    Ms. Simon. Thank you.1577    Mr. Gonzalez [continuing]. Biden's policies did.1578    Ms. Simon. I am going to move forward. What about housing?1579Is DEI the reason why two teachers working in any state in this1580country cannot afford to buy a house?1581    Mr. Gonzalez. Again, I would say Biden.1582    Ms. Simon. Okay. Biden is the reason why, but not DEI, so1583Biden.1584    Mr. Gonzalez. I do not think DEI has anything to do with1585it.1586    Ms. Simon. But Biden is not the President right now, but we1587will move forward.1588    Ms. Stepman--and if I mispronounce your name, I really1589apologize. American families on average paid $310 more for1590groceries in 2025 under the current Administration than they1591did in 2024. Yes or no, did DEI cause that?1592    Ms. Stepman. No. There are, in fact, other issues under the1593sun.1594    Ms. Simon. Thank you.1595    Dr. Shires, under our current Administration, gasoline1596prices have increased by more than 50 percent since this1597disastrous war. Is DEI the fault of that?1598    Dr. Shires. I do not believe so.1599    Ms. Simon. Thank you, sir. This is why, you know, I think1600all of us, many folks who are watching, are struggling with the1601conversation today. City after city, in rule space after rule1602space, folks are struggling with the realities of gas and1603grocery prices.1604    Just a few days ago, a family called my office, not from my1605state, from a red state, requesting resources because their1606child's clinical trial was cut by this Administration, that1607baby who is struggling with cancer, the clinical trial is over.1608The port has been taken out of her chest. She will go home to1609die. And we are talking about inclusion and equity and1610diversity. While SNAP benefits are cut, folks cannot afford1611their mortgage, and we are having a conversation about the1612lexicon of diversity.1613    But, okay, did DEI make the President's approval rate fall1614to 39 percent? Is DEI the reason that Republicans cannot pass1615any of their bills on the floor this week? Is DEI the reason1616that the Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship? Did DEI1617kill the dinosaurs? I do not think that the American people are1618buying this attempt to divide and distract and scapegoat.1619Because what I would say, Mr. Chairman, it is feeling and1620sounding a lot like 1967 in this room. If you know, you know.1621We know what is happening. We know what this conversation is1622really about. And none of us have any real answers about what1623we are doing today outside of having a conversation that is set1624to break the commitment to include all Americans, to uplift the1625fact that we look different. We have different languages. We1626may pray differently. But the assault on that beauty, that is1627what we are litigating. Okay. But it is disgusting.1628    And you want to blame DEI. You want to blame foreigners.1629You want to blame people of color for the price of gas, for the1630unaffordability in this country, and the fact that literally1631right down the street, folks who are working two and three jobs1632cannot afford to take their baby to daycare.1633    And I will yield back. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, for1634this conversation today.1635    Mr. Gill. Thank you, Ms. Simon.1636    And I would just note that DEI policies are what drove the1637United States allowing foreigners to buy up homes with Federal1638Housing Administration (FHA) loans. I think they did drive up1639the price of housing.1640    Ms. Simon. Mr. Chairman, do you want to talk about the GI1641Bill in the Stanford study----1642    Mr. Gill. I am happy to talk about anything you would like1643to talk about.1644    Ms. Simon [continuing]. That literally showed tens of1645thousands of mortgages being taken out, and less than one1646percent of those GI mortgages are one percent.1647    Mr. Gill. I think that what our side of the aisle is hoping1648for is for college admissions and business hiring decisions to1649not be based on race.1650    Ms. Simon. I do not think that White men are in the1651minority of any of the top ten colleges.1652    Mr. Gill. I do not either. I never suggested that.1653    With that, and without objection, all Members have five1654legislative days within which to submit materials and1655additional written questions for the witnesses, which will be1656forwarded to the witnesses.1657    If there is no further business, without objection, the1658Task Force stands adjourned.1659    [Whereupon, at 11:28 a.m., the Task Force was adjourned.]16601661                                 [all]