Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Just the Facts: DEI

Just the Facts: DEI

Colorful figures in a circle.

Getty Images, AndreyPopov

The Fulcrum strives to approach news stories with an open mind and skepticism, looking to present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best as we can, we work to remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces.

However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.


In the last three weeks, the news has been dominated by the Trump Administration's elimination of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. This writing presents our readers with just the facts on DEI.

QUESTION: What do the initials D, E, and I in DEI mean?

Diversity: This refers to the presence of differences within a given setting. It can include various dimensions such as race, ethnicity, gender, age, sexual orientation, disability, socioeconomic status, and more.

Equity: Equity is about ensuring fair treatment, opportunities, and advancement while striving to identify and eliminate barriers that have prevented the full participation of some groups. It involves leveling the playing field and addressing systemic inequities.

Inclusion: Inclusion refers to creating environments in which any individual or group can feel welcomed, respected, supported, and valued. It’s about ensuring that diverse individuals can fully participate in organizational and societal activities.

QUESTION: Did DEI policies change under the Biden Administration?

The  Biden Administration made several changes to DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) policies. One of the key changes was the Executive Order 13985, issued on Biden's first day in office, which aimed to advance racial equity and support for underserved communities through the federal government. This order led to the creation of Equity Action Plans by federal agencies to detail how they were furthering DEI initiatives.

QUESTION: Did President Trump sign an executive order ending DEI for the Federal Government?:

President Trump signed an executive order on January 22, 2025, to terminate DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) programs within the federal government. This order aimed to eliminate what the administration described as "illegal and immoral discrimination programs" and to ensure that federal employment practices, including hiring and promotions, were based solely on merit and individual performance, without considering DEI factors.

The order also directed federal agencies to combat DEI-related discrimination in the private sector and revoked previous executive orders that mandated affirmative action and other DEI initiatives.

QUESTION: Is there any evidence that Federal DEI practices or policies lowered standards?:

There's been a lot of debate around this topic. Critics, including former President Trump, have argued that DEI practices led to lowered standards, particularly in sectors like air traffic control. They claim that DEI initiatives resulted in hiring individuals who didn't meet the necessary qualifications, potentially compromising safety and efficiency.

However, supporters of DEI policies argue that these initiatives are designed to promote fairness and equal opportunity without compromising standards. They emphasize that DEI programs aim to ensure that all individuals, regardless of their background, have a fair chance at employment and advancement.

It's a contentious issue with strong opinions on both sides.

QUESTION: Does a diverse workforce increase productivity?

Research suggests that a diverse workforce can increase productivity. Here are a few key points:

  1. Broader Range of Ideas: Diverse teams bring together different perspectives, experiences, and ideas, which can lead to more innovative solutions and better decision-making.
  2. Enhanced Problem-Solving: Teams with diverse members are often better at problem-solving because they can approach challenges from multiple angles.
  3. Improved Employee Engagement: When employees feel included and valued, they are more likely to be engaged and motivated, which can boost productivity.
  4. Better Customer Insights: A diverse workforce can better understand and cater to a diverse customer base, leading to improved customer satisfaction and loyalty.

However, it's important to note that the benefits of diversity are maximized when it is well-managed and when inclusive practices are in place to ensure that all employees feel supported and valued.

QUESTION: Which corporations have refused to eliminate DEI policies and which have rescinded DEI policies?

Several major corporations have recently taken different stances on DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) policies. Here's a brief overview:

Corporations Refusing to Eliminate DEI Policies:

  1. Costco: Despite pressure from conservative groups and state attorneys general, Costco's shareholders voted overwhelmingly (98%) to maintain their DEI initiatives.
  2. Delta Air Lines: Delta's chief legal officer emphasized the airline's commitment to DEI, stating it is critical to their business.
  3. Cleveland Cavaliers: The NBA team continues to support DEI, believing it uplifts their community.
  4. Apple: Apple remains committed to DEI, continuing to invest in diversity initiatives.
  5. Goldman Sachs: The financial giant stands by its DEI programs, emphasizing the benefits of diverse perspectives.

Corporations That Have Rescinded DEI Policies:

  1. Target: Target announced the discontinuation of its DEI initiatives, citing an evolving external landscape and increased legal threats.
  2. Walmart: Walmart scaled back its DEI efforts, aiming to reduce potential legal exposure and divisive public opinion.
  3. Meta (Facebook): Meta has eliminated certain DEI programs related to hiring, training, and supplier selection.
  4. McDonald's: McDonald's revised its DEI protocols, no longer setting goals for diversity in senior leadership and rebranding its diversity team.
  5. Amazon: Amazon halted some of its DEI diversity and inclusion plans.

QUESTION: Which state governments have DEI hiring policies?

State governments have taken varied approaches to DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) hiring policies. Here's a brief overview:

States Strengthening DEI Protections:

  1. California: Strengthened pay transparency laws and expanded DEI reporting requirements for large corporations.
  2. New York: Similar to California, New York has reinforced DEI commitments and reporting requirements.
  3. Illinois: Introduced mandatory DEI training for public-sector employers and private corporations above a certain employee threshold.
  4. Washington: Also introduced mandatory DEI training for public-sector employers.
  5. New Jersey: Enforced supplier diversity programs, requiring state contractors to demonstrate commitments to diverse hiring and business partnerships.
  6. Massachusetts: Enforced supplier diversity programs similar to New Jersey.

States Restricting DEI Programs:

  1. Texas: Enacted laws restricting race-based hiring practices and prohibiting mandatory DEI training in public universities and government-funded institutions.
  2. Florida: Similar to Texas, Florida has passed legislation limiting DEI programs.
  3. Tennessee: Limited the use of racial and gender-based hiring preferences in corporate settings.
  4. Georgia: Also limited the use of racial and gender-based hiring preferences.
  5. Iowa: Barred companies with state contracts from implementing affirmative action requirements beyond federal mandates.
  6. South Carolina: Similar to Iowa, South Carolina has restricted DEI programs.

The landscape is quite diverse, with some states doubling down on DEI efforts while others are scaling them back.

SUGGESTION: Just the Facts: Trade Deficits

David Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

All data and information were obtained from Copilot, an AI-powered chatbot owned and operated by Microsoft Corporation.


Read More

Students in a classroom.​

Today, Hispanic-Serving Institutions enroll 64 percent of all Latino college students.

Getty Images, andresr

Tennessee’s Attack on Federal Support for Hispanic-Serving Colleges Hurts Us All

The Tennessee Attorney General has partnered with a conservative legal nonprofit to sue the U.S. Department of Education over programming that supports Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs), colleges, and universities where at least 25% of the undergraduate full-time equivalent student enrollment is Hispanic. On its face, this action claims to oppose “discriminatory” federal funding. In reality, it is part of a broader and deeply troubling trend: a coordinated effort to dismantle educational opportunity for communities of color under the guise of anti-DEI rhetoric.

As a scholar of educational policy and leadership in higher education, I believe we must confront policies that narrow access and undermine equity in education for those who have been historically underserved. What is happening in Tennessee is not just a misguided action—it’s a self-inflicted wound that will harm the state's economic future and deepen historical inequality.

Keep ReadingShow less
Inclusion Is Not a Slogan. It’s the Ground We Walk On.

A miniature globe between a row of blue human figures

Getty Images//Stock Photo

Inclusion Is Not a Slogan. It’s the Ground We Walk On.

After political pressure and a federal investigation, Harvard University recently renamed and restructured its Office for Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging. MIT announced the closure of its DEI office, stating that it would no longer support centralized diversity initiatives. Meanwhile, Purdue University shut down its Office of Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging and removed cultural center programs that once served as safe spaces for marginalized students. I am aware of the costs of not engaging with ideas surrounding diversity and difference, and I have witnessed the consequences of the current administration's actions— and the pace at which universities are responding. It’s nowhere good.

I was forced to move to the United States from Russia, a country where the words inclusion, diversity, and equality are either misunderstood, mocked, or treated as dangerous ideology. In this country, a woman over fifty is considered “unfit” for the job market. Disability is not viewed as a condition that warrants accommodation, but rather as a reason to deny employment. LGBTQ+ individuals are treated not as equal citizens but as people who, ideally, shouldn’t exist, where the image of a rainbow on a toy or an ice cream wrapper can result in legal prosecution.

Keep ReadingShow less
Leaders Can Promote Gender Equity Without Deepening Polarization − Here’s How
Getty Images, pixelfit

Leaders Can Promote Gender Equity Without Deepening Polarization − Here’s How

Americans largely agree that women have made significant gains in the workplace over the past two decades. But what about men? While many Americans believe women are thriving, over half believe men’s progress has stalled or even reversed.

To make matters more complex, recent research has revealed a massive divide along gender and partisan lines. The majority of Republican men think full gender equity in America has been achieved, while the majority of Democratic women think there’s still work to be done.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump Is Sabotaging America’s Greatest Demographic Advantage

The U.S. flag, a certification of naturalization, and a U.S. passport.

Getty Images, Thanasis

Trump Is Sabotaging America’s Greatest Demographic Advantage

“A profoundly dangerous and destabilizing thing.” That’s how Vice President J.D. Vance recently described America’s falling birthrate. Recently, the “ inherently pronatalist ” White House is considering a new set of proposals to address it—including government-funded menstrual cycle education and even a national medal for women who bear six or more children. But while Republicans may recognize the problem, their broader agenda actively undermines the most immediate and effective solution to population decline: immigration.

The Trump administration is enacting an all-out assault on immigration. Breaking from decades of Republican rhetoric that championed legal immigration, the current approach targets not just undocumented migration but legal pathways as well.

Keep ReadingShow less