ACLU: DEI and Accessibility, Explained

DEI and Accessibility, Explained

Across the country, right-wing groups are working to dismantle long-standing anti-discrimination protections and statutory mandates by targeting what they broadly refer to as diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA). These attacks on DEIA are not new. Rather, they’re part of a broader strategy to discredit DEIA and weaponize the term itself, expanding its definition to encompass any ideas right-wing politicians disagree with under the guise of opposing “identity politics.”

Since the Supreme Court's blow to affirmative action in higher education admissions in 2023, state lawmakers have introduced more than 106 anti-DEIA bills. Now, President Donald Trump’s administration is working to eradicate DEIA initiatives and civil rights protections with executive orders that would reverse decades of federal anti-discrimination policies.

We know that these policies and initiatives are essential to upholding civil rights, addressing discrimination, and ensuring all communities have a chance at the American dream. Though Trump and other right-wing leaders have threatened to turn back the clock on many years of progress, nothing in federal law has changed. Decades of legal precedent remain and institutions continue to have an obligation to uphold them.

What is Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility?

DEIA is not an abstract concept; it is a framework for building institutions where everyone belongs and is able to thrive, while addressing systemic barriers that have historically excluded marginalized communities.

• Diversity ensures representation among qualified persons across race, national origin, sex, gender, sexual orientation, disability, age, socioeconomic status, military status, shared ancestry, parental status, persons who live in rural communities, and more so that institutions reflect the communities they serve.
• Equity recognizes that inequalities exist and works to dismantle the barriers that disproportionately harm marginalized communities, ensuring fairness in access to resources and opportunities.
• Inclusion ensures that institutions are not just diverse, but that all individuals, especially those historically excluded, can fully participate and contribute without fear of discrimination or bias.
• Accessibility expands opportunities for individuals of all abilities by removing physical, technological, and systemic barriers that may prevent full participation in society through reasonable accommodations, inclusive work and public spaces, and more.

By embedding these principles into admission practices in educational institutions and recruitment, promotion, and retention efforts within workplaces and the military, we create a diverse, equitable, inclusive, and accessible America that betters education outcomes, increases business performance, and creates equitable opportunity for all, not special privileges for some.

Where Did DEIA Originate?

DEIA initiatives were a direct response to widespread, institutionalized discrimination in America. Landmark policies, like the Civil Rights Act of 1964, laid the groundwork to outlaw discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Over time, additional federal anti-discrimination laws such as Title IX and the Americans with Disabilities Act expanded civil rights protections to include gender equity, disability rights, and protections for LGBTQ+ individuals. Building on these legal foundations, public and private sector entities expanded initiatives, programs, and workplace policies to increase access to education, employment, and public contracting opportunities.

How is DEIA Under Attack?

The recent attacks on civil rights protections are part of a larger backlash that has intensified starting in 2020, when the killings of George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, and Breonna Taylor sparked unprecedented nationwide protests that ignited a renewed push for racial justice. In response, workplaces, schools, and other institutions worked to expand DEIA efforts in their communities, inciting aggressive pushback from far-right leaders. This backlash has escalated and the Trump administration is now taking action to dismantle DEIA policies and anti-discrimination protections in public and private institutions.

In addition, the Trump administration has called to dismantle, impose significant budget cuts and employee reductions on, federal agencies that play a crucial role in ensuring fair hiring practices, enforcing civil rights laws and regulations, and addressing racial and economic disparities. Agencies including the Department of Education, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. These agencies not only enforce civil rights laws and regulations to prevent and combat discrimination, they also ensure that government programs remain accessible to all individuals, including people of color, women, LGBTQ+ individuals, people with disabilities, and those with limited English proficiency.

The push to dismantle DEIA and reduce or eliminate the enforcement authority of federal agencies represents a coordinated and deliberate attack on long-standing civil rights advancements. These efforts, including Trump’s executive order to roll back policies that have empowered the Department of Labor to affirmatively ensure equal opportunity in federal contracting since 1965, threaten to undo decades of federal anti-discrimination policies.

How Does DEIA Impact Our Lives?

Education: DEIA is integral to ensuring that all students receive a quality education. Research has shown that inclusive K-12 and college curricula and environments are highly predictive of student retention and academic success – not just for students of color, but for all students. When young people feel they belong and have access to diverse spaces, they can fully engage academically, increase understanding and respect across differences, and succeed in society.

The principles of DEIA are deeply embedded in the provision of education, including in effective pedagogy and state and local laws and standards. DEIA efforts in education include policies that ensure educational environments are free from harassment or discrimination, as well as permit students to embrace their identities and learn about their history.

Military: DEIA policies in the military help ensure that qualified individuals are not excluded based on race, sex, gender, sexual orientation, religion, or disability – factors unrelated to their ability to serve. Military leaders themselves have pushed back, defending DEIA efforts by emphasizing that a diverse and inclusive military is a stronger and more effective force.

Throughout military history, however, discriminatory policies kept entire groups of people from serving in the armed forces. Black service members were subject to segregation through World War II and LGBTQ+ service members were forced to hide their identities under policies like Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell until its repeal in 2011. Transgender individuals were similarly restricted from service until the Pentagon lifted that ban in 2016, only to see their efforts rolled back under the Trump administration and then reinstated again in 2021. Women, too, faced systemic exclusion, barred from combat roles until 2015, when the military finally opened up previously off-limits positions.

Workplace: Building diverse, equitable, and inclusive workplaces is essential for strengthening businesses, fostering innovation, and driving economic growth in both public and private sectors. DEIA efforts in employment include: Programs that aim to prevent workplace discrimination and harassment, pursuant to federal, state, and local laws and regulations; actions to achieve pay equity and transparency; parental leave and lactation rooms for nursing/pumping; time off for religious observances; mental health and disability resources and more.

When employers commit to DEIA, they: Reduce legal and financial risk by minimizing employment discrimination claims and the monetary settlements and judgments that can follow; .Foster inclusive, comfortable, and supportive work environments that lead to a productive workforce; and Drive innovation and profit by leveraging the diverse ideas, perspectives, and experiences of employees who are representative of every aspect of both American and global societies.

What Happens Next to DEIA Efforts?

The ACLU will speak out against efforts from the federal government to attack DEIA and erase decades of progress toward a more equitable society. Everyone benefits when we all have access to the core pillars of our democratic society that ensure equitable access to opportunity.

The ACLU, our affiliates, and our partners in the movement will continue to challenge threats to critical federal anti-discrimination protections and unlawful attempts to bully institutions into abandoning these essential practices for ensuring everyone has a chance to succeed. Now more than ever, institutions must stand firm in their commitment to diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility.

Published February 28, 2025 at 03:29AM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/0ytD2cK

ACLU: DEI and Accessibility, Explained

DEI and Accessibility, Explained

Across the country, right-wing groups are working to dismantle long-standing anti-discrimination protections and statutory mandates by targeting what they broadly refer to as diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA). These attacks on DEIA are not new. Rather, they’re part of a broader strategy to discredit DEIA and weaponize the term itself, expanding its definition to encompass any ideas right-wing politicians disagree with under the guise of opposing “identity politics.”

Since the Supreme Court's blow to affirmative action in higher education admissions in 2023, state lawmakers have introduced more than 106 anti-DEIA bills. Now, President Donald Trump’s administration is working to eradicate DEIA initiatives and civil rights protections with executive orders that would reverse decades of federal anti-discrimination policies.

We know that these policies and initiatives are essential to upholding civil rights, addressing discrimination, and ensuring all communities have a chance at the American dream. Though Trump and other right-wing leaders have threatened to turn back the clock on many years of progress, nothing in federal law has changed. Decades of legal precedent remain and institutions continue to have an obligation to uphold them.

What is Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility?

DEIA is not an abstract concept; it is a framework for building institutions where everyone belongs and is able to thrive, while addressing systemic barriers that have historically excluded marginalized communities.

• Diversity ensures representation among qualified persons across race, national origin, sex, gender, sexual orientation, disability, age, socioeconomic status, military status, shared ancestry, parental status, persons who live in rural communities, and more so that institutions reflect the communities they serve.
• Equity recognizes that inequalities exist and works to dismantle the barriers that disproportionately harm marginalized communities, ensuring fairness in access to resources and opportunities.
• Inclusion ensures that institutions are not just diverse, but that all individuals, especially those historically excluded, can fully participate and contribute without fear of discrimination or bias.
• Accessibility expands opportunities for individuals of all abilities by removing physical, technological, and systemic barriers that may prevent full participation in society through reasonable accommodations, inclusive work and public spaces, and more.

By embedding these principles into admission practices in educational institutions and recruitment, promotion, and retention efforts within workplaces and the military, we create a diverse, equitable, inclusive, and accessible America that betters education outcomes, increases business performance, and creates equitable opportunity for all, not special privileges for some.

Where Did DEIA Originate?

DEIA initiatives were a direct response to widespread, institutionalized discrimination in America. Landmark policies, like the Civil Rights Act of 1964, laid the groundwork to outlaw discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Over time, additional federal anti-discrimination laws such as Title IX and the Americans with Disabilities Act expanded civil rights protections to include gender equity, disability rights, and protections for LGBTQ+ individuals. Building on these legal foundations, public and private sector entities expanded initiatives, programs, and workplace policies to increase access to education, employment, and public contracting opportunities.

How is DEIA Under Attack?

The recent attacks on civil rights protections are part of a larger backlash that has intensified starting in 2020, when the killings of George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, and Breonna Taylor sparked unprecedented nationwide protests that ignited a renewed push for racial justice. In response, workplaces, schools, and other institutions worked to expand DEIA efforts in their communities, inciting aggressive pushback from far-right leaders. This backlash has escalated and the Trump administration is now taking action to dismantle DEIA policies and anti-discrimination protections in public and private institutions.

In addition, the Trump administration has called to dismantle, impose significant budget cuts and employee reductions on, federal agencies that play a crucial role in ensuring fair hiring practices, enforcing civil rights laws and regulations, and addressing racial and economic disparities. Agencies including the Department of Education, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. These agencies not only enforce civil rights laws and regulations to prevent and combat discrimination, they also ensure that government programs remain accessible to all individuals, including people of color, women, LGBTQ+ individuals, people with disabilities, and those with limited English proficiency.

The push to dismantle DEIA and reduce or eliminate the enforcement authority of federal agencies represents a coordinated and deliberate attack on long-standing civil rights advancements. These efforts, including Trump’s executive order to roll back policies that have empowered the Department of Labor to affirmatively ensure equal opportunity in federal contracting since 1965, threaten to undo decades of federal anti-discrimination policies.

How Does DEIA Impact Our Lives?

Education: DEIA is integral to ensuring that all students receive a quality education. Research has shown that inclusive K-12 and college curricula and environments are highly predictive of student retention and academic success – not just for students of color, but for all students. When young people feel they belong and have access to diverse spaces, they can fully engage academically, increase understanding and respect across differences, and succeed in society.

The principles of DEIA are deeply embedded in the provision of education, including in effective pedagogy and state and local laws and standards. DEIA efforts in education include policies that ensure educational environments are free from harassment or discrimination, as well as permit students to embrace their identities and learn about their history.

Military: DEIA policies in the military help ensure that qualified individuals are not excluded based on race, sex, gender, sexual orientation, religion, or disability – factors unrelated to their ability to serve. Military leaders themselves have pushed back, defending DEIA efforts by emphasizing that a diverse and inclusive military is a stronger and more effective force.

Throughout military history, however, discriminatory policies kept entire groups of people from serving in the armed forces. Black service members were subject to segregation through World War II and LGBTQ+ service members were forced to hide their identities under policies like Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell until its repeal in 2011. Transgender individuals were similarly restricted from service until the Pentagon lifted that ban in 2016, only to see their efforts rolled back under the Trump administration and then reinstated again in 2021. Women, too, faced systemic exclusion, barred from combat roles until 2015, when the military finally opened up previously off-limits positions.

Workplace: Building diverse, equitable, and inclusive workplaces is essential for strengthening businesses, fostering innovation, and driving economic growth in both public and private sectors. DEIA efforts in employment include: Programs that aim to prevent workplace discrimination and harassment, pursuant to federal, state, and local laws and regulations; actions to achieve pay equity and transparency; parental leave and lactation rooms for nursing/pumping; time off for religious observances; mental health and disability resources and more.

When employers commit to DEIA, they: Reduce legal and financial risk by minimizing employment discrimination claims and the monetary settlements and judgments that can follow; .Foster inclusive, comfortable, and supportive work environments that lead to a productive workforce; and Drive innovation and profit by leveraging the diverse ideas, perspectives, and experiences of employees who are representative of every aspect of both American and global societies.

What Happens Next to DEIA Efforts?

The ACLU will speak out against efforts from the federal government to attack DEIA and erase decades of progress toward a more equitable society. Everyone benefits when we all have access to the core pillars of our democratic society that ensure equitable access to opportunity.

The ACLU, our affiliates, and our partners in the movement will continue to challenge threats to critical federal anti-discrimination protections and unlawful attempts to bully institutions into abandoning these essential practices for ensuring everyone has a chance to succeed. Now more than ever, institutions must stand firm in their commitment to diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility.

Published February 27, 2025 at 09:59PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/ebMpo0t

ACLU: 'We Have to Reclaim Race and Racism'

'We Have to Reclaim Race and Racism'

“What matters to me, as a former teacher and current litigator, is that students see themselves in what they learn and feel empowered to make change,” says Leah Watson, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU's Racial Justice Program. “It’s unacceptable to force students to accept the government’s talking points even when those views are not only inaccurate, but racist and sexist.”

As a member of the ACLU’s Racial Justice Project since 2020, Watson’s work focuses on preventing the government from enforcing its discriminatory agenda. She has, understandably, been even busier since President Donald Trump was reelected and began to gut federally-supported diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs and to coerce other entities – like universities or workplaces – into abandoning DEI entirely.

Watson was ready for it. She’s been here before.

Leah Watson

Credit: Leah Watson

Watson is a member of the legal team that challenged Florida’s Stop W.O.K.E Act — one of the broadest state laws to come out of the “war on woke” — that focused on restricting any instruction perceived as affirming the role that race plays in American society. The ACLU’s lawsuit successfully blocked enforcement of the higher education restrictions of the STOP W.O.K.E Act, a decision that has been appealed.

While blocking the Stop W.O.K.E Act is a win, Trump and conservative politicians have continued to pass unconstitutional laws and executive orders to censor student and faculty speech about race, racism, sex, and sexism. These bills not only violate educators’ First and 14th Amendments – they’re a violation of students’ First Amendment right to receive information, an injustice that Watson, a former Political Science and World History educator, is inspired to stop.

“Censorship has an outsized impact on young people who are in school for such a limited period and may never receive instruction necessary to equip them to live in a diverse society. They need to develop critical thinking, analysis, and problem solving skills to succeed,” Watson says. “The classroom should be that space; it should not be limited to regurgitation of the government’s talking points.”

When any student is denied the right to learn – one that includes instruction on racism and sexism, as well as narratives from BIPOC and LGBTQ authors, experts and characters – they are denied the right to see themselves reflected in what they’re taught, to form their own opinions, to express themselves and to truly connect to the concepts they’re learning. Watson notes that the current and proposed censorship laws would have prevented her from educating her students on their own history.

Leah Watson teaching class.

Credit: Leah Watson

“How could I explain the need for the 13th, 14th, or 19th Amendments without any discussion of racism or sexism?” she wonders. “What about the 3/5ths compromise or the existence of oppression in other cultures? Even current events, like racially-motivated mass shootings, require context that would be prohibited.”

In addition to ensuring her students had the tools needed to think critically in a diverse society, as an educator, Watson also personalised her teaching strategies to the strengths and weaknesses of students in a process known as differentiation, which is simply meeting students where they are. Some students need to learn vocabulary to access the textbook while others have mastered the vocabulary and are ready to build analytical skills, including prediction.

Even as she saw success with her students, Watson understood that the achievement gap isn’t limited to classrooms. “So many of the issues that stop students from learning – malnutrition, poverty, homelessness, violence – are things that happen before they even get to school,” Watson explains. “I wanted to have a tangible impact on young people [because I recognized that] performance on quizzes depends on more than classroom instruction. Students’ immediate needs must be met for their brains to have capacity to learn.”

Leah Watson's class working on a group project.

Credit: Leah Watson

Seeing the obstacles to closing the achievement gap inspired Watson to explore other avenues to support Black and brown families, especially students. While attending Harvard Law School, she worked with young people facing adversity, including children experiencing trauma and survivors of domestic violence. As a civil rights litigator, some of her earliest work challenged the criminalization of poverty, and developed strategies to reduce violent police encounters with students. She also focused on how race can be used to increase equity not just in school, but in the workforce, in health care, law enforcement, in trainings and more. Of course, the idea that race can – and should – be considered runs counter to the Trump administration’s discriminatory narrative that uses equity-based concepts and practices, like DEI and CRT, as racialized dog whistles.

“The so-called attack on DEI is much broader than actual DEI, which is a strategy to increase the recruitment, promotion, and retention of historically marginalized groups,” Watson says. “It is an attempt to re-whitewash history and avoid the historic, systemic, and present denial of opportunity and access due to white supremacy and patriarchy.”

Right now, anti-DEI efforts are the new frontier in the racial justice movement and Watson is at the forefront of the fight. For years, she has been following the anti-equity agenda to identify the key actors and the playbook they’re using to deny the existence of racism and sexism across industries or institutions in society. Today, she’s focused on using that information to mount an offense against attacks on DEI, like the Trump administration’s recent executive orders bullying private and governmental entities into abandoning legal DEI efforts to promote equity and remedy systemic discrimination.

For Watson, not only are the Trump administration’s efforts unlawful and harmful, they single out marginalized groups for erasure. So often, Watson explains, she speaks with clients who tell her she was one of the first people to listen to their experience and explain how their constitutional rights have been infringed. This reaffirms for Watson that, even when powerful politicians denigrate her work and her community, the fight for racial justice and equity is – and has always been – about people.

“To me, winning is not about winning a case,” Watson says. “It’s about winning someone’s understanding and faith. It’s about fighting for people whose existence is being ignored or erased.”

Our series, Behind the Fight for Our Rights, asks individuals defending our freedoms how they’re thinking about the next four years. Below, Watson shares insight into her life – both professional and personal – under the Trump administration.

ACLU: What are you most looking forward to in the next four years?

WATSON: I’m most looking forward to affirmatively pursuing and holding the line on consideration of race in various settings. I’m looking forward to resisting efforts to minimize or ignore the impact of racism across industries or institutions in society.

ACLU: What is the biggest challenge you’re expecting in the next four years?

WATSON: Professionally, my biggest challenge will be to counter the erasure of the continuing effects of discrimination in our society. Discrimination doesn’t cease to exist because President Trump won’t acknowledge it. We must use our legal tools to establish the need for continued consideration of race and other protected categories where necessary to ensure opportunity and access for all.

ACLU: What do you wish people knew more about the fight for racial justice?

WATSON: People believe that racial justice work only benefits BIPOC people, but it’s for everyone. We all benefit from a diverse society where everyone has opportunity.

ACLU: What is one thing you wish you knew about the fight for racial justice?

WATSON: I wish I knew more ways of affirmatively reclaiming the terms race and racism. We’re seeing both those words being demonised and made toxic in ways that aren’t true.

Published February 28, 2025 at 12:49AM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/TSedZAU

ACLU: 'We Have to Reclaim Race and Racism'

'We Have to Reclaim Race and Racism'

“What matters to me, as a former teacher and current litigator, is that students see themselves in what they learn and feel empowered to make change,” says Leah Watson, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU's Racial Justice Program. “It’s unacceptable to force students to accept the government’s talking points even when those views are not only inaccurate, but racist and sexist.”

As a member of the ACLU’s Racial Justice Project since 2020, Watson’s work focuses on preventing the government from enforcing its discriminatory agenda. She has, understandably, been even busier since President Donald Trump was reelected and began to gut federally-supported diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs and to coerce other entities – like universities or workplaces – into abandoning DEI entirely.

Watson was ready for it. She’s been here before.

Leah Watson

Credit: Leah Watson

Watson is a member of the legal team that challenged Florida’s Stop W.O.K.E Act — one of the broadest state laws to come out of the “war on woke” — that focused on restricting any instruction perceived as affirming the role that race plays in American society. The ACLU’s lawsuit successfully blocked enforcement of the higher education restrictions of the STOP W.O.K.E Act, a decision that has been appealed.

While blocking the Stop W.O.K.E Act is a win, Trump and conservative politicians have continued to pass unconstitutional laws and executive orders to censor student and faculty speech about race, racism, sex, and sexism. These bills not only violate educators’ First and 14th Amendments – they’re a violation of students’ First Amendment right to receive information, an injustice that Watson, a former Political Science and World History educator, is inspired to stop.

“Censorship has an outsized impact on young people who are in school for such a limited period and may never receive instruction necessary to equip them to live in a diverse society. They need to develop critical thinking, analysis, and problem solving skills to succeed,” Watson says. “The classroom should be that space; it should not be limited to regurgitation of the government’s talking points.”

When any student is denied the right to learn – one that includes instruction on racism and sexism, as well as narratives from BIPOC and LGBTQ authors, experts and characters – they are denied the right to see themselves reflected in what they’re taught, to form their own opinions, to express themselves and to truly connect to the concepts they’re learning. Watson notes that the current and proposed censorship laws would have prevented her from educating her students on their own history.

Leah Watson teaching class.

Credit: Leah Watson

“How could I explain the need for the 13th, 14th, or 19th Amendments without any discussion of racism or sexism?” she wonders. “What about the 3/5ths compromise or the existence of oppression in other cultures? Even current events, like racially-motivated mass shootings, require context that would be prohibited.”

In addition to ensuring her students had the tools needed to think critically in a diverse society, as an educator, Watson also personalised her teaching strategies to the strengths and weaknesses of students in a process known as differentiation, which is simply meeting students where they are. Some students need to learn vocabulary to access the textbook while others have mastered the vocabulary and are ready to build analytical skills, including prediction.

Even as she saw success with her students, Watson understood that the achievement gap isn’t limited to classrooms. “So many of the issues that stop students from learning – malnutrition, poverty, homelessness, violence – are things that happen before they even get to school,” Watson explains. “I wanted to have a tangible impact on young people [because I recognized that] performance on quizzes depends on more than classroom instruction. Students’ immediate needs must be met for their brains to have capacity to learn.”

Leah Watson's class working on a group project.

Credit: Leah Watson

Seeing the obstacles to closing the achievement gap inspired Watson to explore other avenues to support Black and brown families, especially students. While attending Harvard Law School, she worked with young people facing adversity, including children experiencing trauma and survivors of domestic violence. As a civil rights litigator, some of her earliest work challenged the criminalization of poverty, and developed strategies to reduce violent police encounters with students. She also focused on how race can be used to increase equity not just in school, but in the workforce, in health care, law enforcement, in trainings and more. Of course, the idea that race can – and should – be considered runs counter to the Trump administration’s discriminatory narrative that uses equity-based concepts and practices, like DEI and CRT, as racialized dog whistles.

“The so-called attack on DEI is much broader than actual DEI, which is a strategy to increase the recruitment, promotion, and retention of historically marginalized groups,” Watson says. “It is an attempt to re-whitewash history and avoid the historic, systemic, and present denial of opportunity and access due to white supremacy and patriarchy.”

Right now, anti-DEI efforts are the new frontier in the racial justice movement and Watson is at the forefront of the fight. For years, she has been following the anti-equity agenda to identify the key actors and the playbook they’re using to deny the existence of racism and sexism across industries or institutions in society. Today, she’s focused on using that information to mount an offense against attacks on DEI, like the Trump administration’s recent executive orders bullying private and governmental entities into abandoning legal DEI efforts to promote equity and remedy systemic discrimination.

For Watson, not only are the Trump administration’s efforts unlawful and harmful, they single out marginalized groups for erasure. So often, Watson explains, she speaks with clients who tell her she was one of the first people to listen to their experience and explain how their constitutional rights have been infringed. This reaffirms for Watson that, even when powerful politicians denigrate her work and her community, the fight for racial justice and equity is – and has always been – about people.

“To me, winning is not about winning a case,” Watson says. “It’s about winning someone’s understanding and faith. It’s about fighting for people whose existence is being ignored or erased.”

Our series, Behind the Fight for Our Rights, asks individuals defending our freedoms how they’re thinking about the next four years. Below, Watson shares insight into her life – both professional and personal – under the Trump administration.

ACLU: What are you most looking forward to in the next four years?

WATSON: I’m most looking forward to affirmatively pursuing and holding the line on consideration of race in various settings. I’m looking forward to resisting efforts to minimize or ignore the impact of racism across industries or institutions in society.

ACLU: What is the biggest challenge you’re expecting in the next four years?

WATSON: Professionally, my biggest challenge will be to counter the erasure of the continuing effects of discrimination in our society. Discrimination doesn’t cease to exist because President Trump won’t acknowledge it. We must use our legal tools to establish the need for continued consideration of race and other protected categories where necessary to ensure opportunity and access for all.

ACLU: What do you wish people knew more about the fight for racial justice?

WATSON: People believe that racial justice work only benefits BIPOC people, but it’s for everyone. We all benefit from a diverse society where everyone has opportunity.

ACLU: What is one thing you wish you knew about the fight for racial justice?

WATSON: I wish I knew more ways of affirmatively reclaiming the terms race and racism. We’re seeing both those words being demonised and made toxic in ways that aren’t true.

Published February 27, 2025 at 07:19PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/IAdkRvF

ACLU: Where Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Nominee Harmeet Dhillon Stands on Civil Liberties

Where Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Nominee Harmeet Dhillon Stands on Civil Liberties

President Donald Trump has nominated Harmeet Dhillon, an attorney, media personality, and Republican Party official, to lead the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ). If confirmed, Dhillon will lead the division of the DOJ charged with upholding core civil rights and liberties in many aspects of American life.

Dhillon is known for her work supporting President Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election as well as for her persistent attacks against transgender people, their rights, and their health care. She is founder of the Dhillon Law Group and the Center for American Liberty, a right-wing impact litigation organization.

While the ACLU does not endorse or oppose executive branch nominees as a matter of organizational policy, we have spent more than 100 years holding power accountable. In line with that history, we are examining and publicizing nominees’ records on civil rights and civil liberties and urging senators to seek and obtain commitments from nominees on key concerns. We note that nominee Dhillon served on the board of the ACLU of Northern California from 2002 – 2005 and while we appreciate her support of civil rights and liberties during that time, we have strong concerns about the evolution of her positions and her recent record.

The DOJ’s Civil Rights Division was created for the very purpose of safeguarding the civil and constitutional rights of the most vulnerable among us, and it is charged with enforcing a wide range of federal civil rights laws. Consequently, ahead of Dhillon’s confirmation hearing, we’re analyzing her record on key issues, highlighting areas for senators to question the nominee and secure commitments to uphold our rights.

The Vital Role of the DOJ Civil Rights Division

Often called the “crown jewel” of the DOJ, the Civil Rights Division plays a crucial role in defending all civil rights and liberties, especially for marginalized communities. It is responsible for enforcing federal voting and election laws that protect access to the ballot, including the Voting Rights Act, Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, National Voter Registration Act, and Help America Vote Act. These critical federal laws safeguard against voting discrimination based on race, language, and disability; provide for and facilitate voter registration opportunities without unreasonable burdens; set standards for election administration; ensure accessibility for military and overseas voters; and help ensure every eligible American can cast their vote and have their vote counted equally.

Through direct and coordinated actions, the Civil Rights Division enforces federal statutes prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex (including pregnancy, sexual orientation, and gender identity), disability, religion, familial status, national origin, and citizenship status across many areas of life: employment, housing, education, and public accommodations. It works across federal agencies to achieve a strong, consistent approach to civil rights enforcement and ensure that recipients of federal funding abide by nondiscrimination requirements. It is charged with enforcing federal hate crime laws protecting against violence and threats on account of race, color, national origin, religion, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.

The Civil Rights Division is also tasked with investigating and taking action against police misconduct and discriminatory practices, as well as with protecting access to reproductive services. The Civil Rights Division enforces the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, which prohibits interfering with access to abortion services, pharmacy-provided reproductive health services, pregnancy counseling services and other reproductive health care using violence, threats, obstruction, or property damage.

The scope and gravity of these responsibilities cannot be overstated and require a deeply-rooted commitment to protecting the civil rights of every individual, especially those in marginalized communities. Dhillon’s confirmation hearing comes as the current administration is abusing its power to unrelentingly attack and erode the civil rights and liberties of vulnerable communities across the country. This includes executive actions to undo decades of non-discrimination protections, restrict access to a diverse and inclusive education, and erase transgender people’s existence under the law, among many others.

Dhillon’s Record on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties

Dhillon has a long record of working to restrict voting rights, transgender rights, and abortion access.

1. Voting and Elections: Dhillon criticized Executive Order 14019 on Promoting Access to Voting that, until President Trump rescinded it, directed agencies to offer nonpartisan voter registration opportunities for eligible Americans. She said it was an effort to “interfere with and override state election efforts.” She also advocated for restrictive policies before Congress, appearing in 2023 and 2021 before the U.S. House Committee on Administration and Subcommittee on Elections, respectively, to condemn private funding for local election administration, criticize provisions of the For the People Act that would require less burdensome voter ID rules, and denounce legal efforts to ensure that voter roll maintenance activities comply with federal law and do not result in eligible voters being improperly removed from voter rolls. Furthermore, Dhillon has played a prominent role in spreading false claims about voting that sow distrust in free and fair elections. She was a key figure in Trump’s challenges to the 2020 election, spreading baseless allegations of voter fraud in the media and through litigation.
2. Protecting Marginalized Communities: Dhillon’s rhetoric and actions have, historically, targeted some of the very people and groups federal nondiscrimination law rightfully seeks to protect. She has criticized efforts to address racial inequalities, calling diversity efforts “racial divisiveness” and “racial balkanization” and referred to undocumented people as “the worst criminals” and “degenerates.” Dhillon has repeatedly targeted the rights of transgender children, using her nonprofit to bring lawsuits to end policies that protect transgender youth in schools, restrict access to necessary, even life-saving, gender-affirming medical care, and end nondiscrimination protections in foster care. Dhillon has also called for transgender women to be excluded from protection under Title IX, the federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in schools and educational programs. She called state shield laws that protect transgender people and gender-affirming care providers unconstitutional, “crazy,” and “super extreme.” Dhillon went so far as to urge that it be “[made] unsafe” for providers of gender-affirming care.
3. Reproductive Freedom: Dhillon has demonstrated her opposition to reproductive freedom. During her campaign for chairwoman of the Republican National Convention in 2022, she told the Washington Examiner “I’m one of the top lawyers for the pro-life movement in the country.”

Commitments Senators Must Demand at Dhillon’s Confirmation Hearing

Based on Dhillon’s track record, the ACLU is deeply concerned that she will attempt to use the Civil Rights Division to harm the very people it was created to protect. At her confirmation hearing, we are urging senators to ask Dhillon:

1. Will you commit to using the authority and resources of the Civil Rights Division to protect and expand voting access; remove barriers faced by voters of color, voters with disabilities, and other marginalized voters; and robustly enforce all federal voting rights laws, including the Voting Rights Act of 1965?
2. The claim that there is widespread voter fraud in our elections has been proven wrong time and time again and only serves to sow distrust in our elections. Do you disavow the claims you’ve made about fraud in our elections, and will you commit to completely refrain from further spreading such false claims?
3. Do you believe the ongoing effort by the state of Texas to remove transgender youth from their parents’ custody because those parents supported their children in receiving medical care recommended by the American Medical Association is a violation of their parental rights? Would you oppose an effort by this administration to punish parents or seek to strip them of custody based on providing medical care to their children?
4. Do you agree that the Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County is a binding interpretation of what Title VII’s sex discrimination protections mean? Will you commit to fully enforcing those protections for LGBTQ people who face discrimination in the workplace?
5. Do you believe that education entities, public accommodations, housing providers, and employers continue to discriminate against persons based on race, color, and national origin? If not, how do you explain ongoing disparities? If so, do you commit that the Civil Rights Division will investigate such discrimination complaints?
6. Do you commit to ensure that the Civil Rights Division vigorously enforces all federal civil rights and nondiscrimination protections for all protected groups, including on the basis of citizenship status, nationality, and gender identity?
7. Will you commit to prosecuting cases involving excessive use of force by police and racial profiling, regardless of political pressure or local opposition, and protect the rights of every person under the Fourth and First Amendment of the Constitution?

Published February 26, 2025 at 03:55AM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/tWSywCu

ACLU: Medicaid is a Lifeline for People with Disabilities. Congress Must Act to Save It.

Medicaid is a Lifeline for People with Disabilities. Congress Must Act to Save It.

Congress is setting the stage to decimate Medicaid.

The House of Representatives put forward a budget resolution that will lead to more than $880 billion in cuts from Medicaid. If approved, these cuts will eviscerate a critical source of health care and stability for 10s of millions of people. Most devastatingly, radical cuts to Medicaid will be catastrophic for people with disabilities for whom Medicaid is a lifeline.

Why is Medicaid a Lifeline for Disabled People and Seniors?

Medicaid is an essential program that provides a wide range of critical health care services and support to millions of people across the country. The impacts of these draconian cuts would be staggering.

More than 10 million people with disabilities are enrolled in Medicaid, making it the largest provider of health care to people with disabilities, including people with mental health conditions. Beyond health care, Medicaid is the primary payer of home and community-based services (HCBS) for nearly 8 million seniors and people with disabilities, including those with complex care needs who depend on these services and supports to get out of bed, go to work, and live in their communities rather than being warehoused in costly and isolated institutions. Any cuts to HCBS will also harm family members who have to reduce hours at work or leave their jobs altogether to care for loved ones.

America’s seniors also rely on Medicaid for nursing home care; two-thirds of people living in nursing facilities are enrolled in Medicaid. Cuts to Medicaid will jeopardize access to nursing facilities and reduce the quality-of-care individuals receive. Many older adults with long-term care needs will be left with limited care options and, in some cases, no options at all if states are unable to fill the funding gap and must close nursing facilities.

How Does Medicaid Support Children and Those with Mental Health Conditions?

Medicaid is the single largest funder of mental health and substance-use disorder care in the country. It provides care to nearly 14 million adults who have a mental health condition or substance use disorder. Medicaid expansion resulted in a significant increase in coverage and care for opioid use disorder (OUD.) Adults with OUD are twice as likely to receive OUD treatment if they have Medicaid than if they are uninsured or on private insurance.

School-age children would also be affected by Medicaid cuts. Medicaid supports more than $7.5 billion in school-based services, including certain services provided to children under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Funding helps pay for speech-language pathologists, audiologists, occupational therapists, school psychologists, school social workers, school nurses, and others who provide comprehensive health services. Medicaid also helps pay for specialized equipment that allows students with disabilities to learn and play alongside their peers. Seven out of 10 school-aged children who receive mental health services access these services at school, supported in large part by Medicaid.

Why Does Medicaid Matter?

Medicaid is the difference between life and death for millions. It enables people, especially those with disabilities, to participate in the economic, social, and civic life of the nation. It advances equal opportunity, dignity, and personal liberty for all.

Eviscerating Medicaid would not just impact those who rely on it for their quality of life, but it would also devastate the approximately 5 million direct care workers — home health aides, nursing assistants, personal care aides — who provide care and support to seniors and people with disabilities. These workers, predominantly low-wage women of color, help with all aspects of daily life, such as bathing, dressing, eating, managing medications, and attending appointments. Medicaid cuts will destabilize the direct-care workforce and jeopardize access to care.

As the House rams through its radical and thoughtless budget resolution that will gut Medicaid, the ACLU wants you to tell your Congress members how these devastating cuts will impact your community and those you know and love. Call your representatives today — and every single day — to tell them to protect Medicaid at all costs.

Published February 26, 2025 at 02:13AM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/VywTxB1

ACLU: Medicaid is a Lifeline for People with Disabilities. Congress Must Act to Save It.

Medicaid is a Lifeline for People with Disabilities. Congress Must Act to Save It.

Congress is setting the stage to decimate Medicaid.

The House of Representatives put forward a budget resolution that will lead to more than $880 billion in cuts from Medicaid. If approved, these cuts will eviscerate a critical source of health care and stability for 10s of millions of people. Most devastatingly, radical cuts to Medicaid will be catastrophic for people with disabilities for whom Medicaid is a lifeline.

Why is Medicaid a Lifeline for Disabled People and Seniors?

Medicaid is an essential program that provides a wide range of critical health care services and support to millions of people across the country. The impacts of these draconian cuts would be staggering.

More than 10 million people with disabilities are enrolled in Medicaid, making it the largest provider of health care to people with disabilities, including people with mental health conditions. Beyond health care, Medicaid is the primary payer of home and community-based services (HCBS) for nearly 8 million seniors and people with disabilities, including those with complex care needs who depend on these services and supports to get out of bed, go to work, and live in their communities rather than being warehoused in costly and isolated institutions. Any cuts to HCBS will also harm family members who have to reduce hours at work or leave their jobs altogether to care for loved ones.

America’s seniors also rely on Medicaid for nursing home care; two-thirds of people living in nursing facilities are enrolled in Medicaid. Cuts to Medicaid will jeopardize access to nursing facilities and reduce the quality-of-care individuals receive. Many older adults with long-term care needs will be left with limited care options and, in some cases, no options at all if states are unable to fill the funding gap and must close nursing facilities.

How Does Medicaid Support Children and Those with Mental Health Conditions?

Medicaid is the single largest funder of mental health and substance-use disorder care in the country. It provides care to nearly 14 million adults who have a mental health condition or substance use disorder. Medicaid expansion resulted in a significant increase in coverage and care for opioid use disorder (OUD.) Adults with OUD are twice as likely to receive OUD treatment if they have Medicaid than if they are uninsured or on private insurance.

School-age children would also be affected by Medicaid cuts. Medicaid supports more than $7.5 billion in school-based services, including certain services provided to children under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Funding helps pay for speech-language pathologists, audiologists, occupational therapists, school psychologists, school social workers, school nurses, and others who provide comprehensive health services. Medicaid also helps pay for specialized equipment that allows students with disabilities to learn and play alongside their peers. Seven out of 10 school-aged children who receive mental health services access these services at school, supported in large part by Medicaid.

Why Does Medicaid Matter?

Medicaid is the difference between life and death for millions. It enables people, especially those with disabilities, to participate in the economic, social, and civic life of the nation. It advances equal opportunity, dignity, and personal liberty for all.

Eviscerating Medicaid would not just impact those who rely on it for their quality of life, but it would also devastate the approximately 5 million direct care workers — home health aides, nursing assistants, personal care aides — who provide care and support to seniors and people with disabilities. These workers, predominantly low-wage women of color, help with all aspects of daily life, such as bathing, dressing, eating, managing medications, and attending appointments. Medicaid cuts will destabilize the direct-care workforce and jeopardize access to care.

As the House rams through its radical and thoughtless budget resolution that will gut Medicaid, the ACLU wants you to tell your Congress members how these devastating cuts will impact your community and those you know and love. Call your representatives today — and every single day — to tell them to protect Medicaid at all costs.

Published February 25, 2025 at 08:43PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/xwuj9OY

ACLU: 'I Won’t Abandon My Country'

'I Won’t Abandon My Country'

I live everyday in fear. My husband, Miguel, is undocumented and, despite what many believe, being married to a U.S. citizen does not protect him from Donald Trump’s unlawful efforts to deport millions of people.

Miguel is my best friend. He is wonderful, kind, and humble. We have a beautiful life that includes a successful business, a home, two children and five grandchildren. It is truly the American dream that so many people in this country strive to build for themselves. Today, it terrifies me to know that everything we’ve worked so hard could be taken from us by cruel immigration policies that argue Miguel isn’t “good enough” to even attempt to become a U.S. citizen.

Miguel has lived in this country for virtually his entire adult life. Even though Miguel has worked hard every day since he came to the states, because of how he entered the country, we’re struggling to find a path to citizenship for him. Miguel has paid taxes like any American despite never knowing if he might become a citizen and reap the benefits, like social security, of his hard work. I could live with that injustice. It was enough for us that he had authorization to work legally and was protected from immediate deportation.

Then Trump was re-elected.

In 2016, the first Trump administration reopened a lot of immigration cases like Miguel’s, trying to find a reason to deport people. We were fortunate to escape notice then, but I’m afraid we won’t be so fortunate now. The new Trump administration is far more cruel and far more determined to deport those it doesn’t view as “worthy” to be American citizens. I am terrified that Miguel will be next on Trump’s deportation list. I have cameras everywhere in my home. I’m scared to sleep, worried that ICE will knock on my door and take my husband. I’m at the point of having a breakdown over not knowing if he’s going to come home after work.

I have hired so many attorneys to find a path to permanent residency and citizenship for Miguel. Every attorney says that they can’t help us. I feel like every door has been closed to us. I can only hold out hope that a humanitarian visa, which acknowledges the hardships Miguel fled when he came to the states, might be available in spite of the Trump administration’s efforts to restrict almost every legal path to citizenship.

While we wait for updates about Miguel’s status, I am determined that I won’t go down without a fight. I am organizing in my community, I am lobbying my lawmakers and I am using my story to advocate for immigration reform. This country can’t keep relying on immigration policies that are more than 30 years out of date and vulnerable to the powerful and discriminatory anti-immigrant agenda that pervades politics today.

But in my fight there is also heartbreak. Miguel has become resigned, believing that there is no hope for him. The despair weighs heavily on our marriage. I don’t want to be separated from him. To stay together if he is deported, we started building a house in Mexico, a place Trump calls a “terrorist country” run by the cartel. It devastates me to think I might have to leave America, my children, my business, my community, and my hope behind just so that I can be with my partner, a man I’ve loved for more than two decades. Miguel is a husband, a father, a hard worker and, most importantly, a human being. He deserves the chance to keep supporting our country and for his chosen country to support him. We’ve worked so hard just to end up terrified that the Trump administration will snatch our American dream from us.

Published February 25, 2025 at 11:45PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/jRuqhsS

ACLU: 'I Won’t Abandon My Country'

'I Won’t Abandon My Country'

I live everyday in fear. My husband, Miguel, is undocumented and, despite what many believe, being married to a U.S. citizen does not protect him from Donald Trump’s unlawful efforts to deport millions of people.

Miguel is my best friend. He is wonderful, kind, and humble. We have a beautiful life that includes a successful business, a home, two children and five grandchildren. It is truly the American dream that so many people in this country strive to build for themselves. Today, it terrifies me to know that everything we’ve worked so hard could be taken from us by cruel immigration policies that argue Miguel isn’t “good enough” to even attempt to become a U.S. citizen.

Miguel has lived in this country for virtually his entire adult life. Even though Miguel has worked hard every day since he came to the states, because of how he entered the country, we’re struggling to find a path to citizenship for him. Miguel has paid taxes like any American despite never knowing if he might become a citizen and reap the benefits, like social security, of his hard work. I could live with that injustice. It was enough for us that he had authorization to work legally and was protected from immediate deportation.

Then Trump was re-elected.

In 2016, the first Trump administration reopened a lot of immigration cases like Miguel’s, trying to find a reason to deport people. We were fortunate to escape notice then, but I’m afraid we won’t be so fortunate now. The new Trump administration is far more cruel and far more determined to deport those it doesn’t view as “worthy” to be American citizens. I am terrified that Miguel will be next on Trump’s deportation list. I have cameras everywhere in my home. I’m scared to sleep, worried that ICE will knock on my door and take my husband. I’m at the point of having a breakdown over not knowing if he’s going to come home after work.

I have hired so many attorneys to find a path to permanent residency and citizenship for Miguel. Every attorney says that they can’t help us. I feel like every door has been closed to us. I can only hold out hope that a humanitarian visa, which acknowledges the hardships Miguel fled when he came to the states, might be available in spite of the Trump administration’s efforts to restrict almost every legal path to citizenship.

While we wait for updates about Miguel’s status, I am determined that I won’t go down without a fight. I am organizing in my community, I am lobbying my lawmakers and I am using my story to advocate for immigration reform. This country can’t keep relying on immigration policies that are more than 30 years out of date and vulnerable to the powerful and discriminatory anti-immigrant agenda that pervades politics today.

But in my fight there is also heartbreak. Miguel has become resigned, believing that there is no hope for him. The despair weighs heavily on our marriage. I don’t want to be separated from him. To stay together if he is deported, we started building a house in Mexico, a place Trump calls a “terrorist country” run by the cartel. It devastates me to think I might have to leave America, my children, my business, my community, and my hope behind just so that I can be with my partner, a man I’ve loved for more than two decades. Miguel is a husband, a father, a hard worker and, most importantly, a human being. He deserves the chance to keep supporting our country and for his chosen country to support him. We’ve worked so hard just to end up terrified that the Trump administration will snatch our American dream from us.

Published February 25, 2025 at 06:15PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/AmGrNT9

ACLU: The Infrastructure of Racial Justice Is Under Attack. We Must Fight for It

The Infrastructure of Racial Justice Is Under Attack. We Must Fight for It

President Donald Trump began February with a proclamation that Black History Month offered “an occasion to celebrate the contributions of so many Black American patriots who have indelibly shaped our nation’s history.” In the closing days of the month, he hosted a Black History Month reception at the White House where he promised he would fight for Black Americans. What he did not mention during his remarks was that the proclamation and reception came amidst a systemic crusade to dismantle the civil rights infrastructure that Black Americans helped build and that sustains our hopes for equal citizenship.

One of the first moves Trump made after his inauguration was to issue a wide-ranging executive order ending the federal government’s diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs and firing the public servants who lead that work. He has moved to end affirmative action programs in federal procurement. He has threatened colleges and universities, intimidated non-profit organizations, and removed Black and women leaders from the nation’s military leadership.

Across the country, Black History Month proceeded against the backdrop of relentless attempts to erase Black history. Enemies of justice have sought to erase history so that past injustices cannot be connected to present inequities. Those who fear racial equality have always understood the importance of silencing stories that give people the hope and the means to build a better future. This whitewashing is a clear and present danger to an inclusive democracy. If Americans do not reflect on slavery’s enduring legacy, on Reconstruction and its violent backlash, on Jim Crow and its transformation into modern mass incarceration, then they cannot fully understand why racial injustice persists today and they will not be equipped to fight it. Now, with President Trump in office, the wind is at their back as he and his allies attempt to bludgeon Black history and Black futures at the highest levels.

But this is not just about how we study history. Much of American history can be understood as the struggle to build an infrastructure of racial justice. That includes the fight to end residential segregation and connect communities of color to opportunity, and the fight to pass and enforce laws like the Reconstruction amendments and the Civil Rights Movement-era laws that sought to move Black Americans closer to the American dream. What we are seeing today is a full-scale attack on that infrastructure; the deeply interconnected systems that make racial justice victories real. This infrastructure includes laws grounded in the 14th Amendment’s promise of equal protection under the law and the benefits of citizenship regardless of race; enforcement structures like the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission or the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice; pathways to upward mobility like the federal workforce; social norms that ensure fair treatment in businesses; the network of activists, educators, and journalists who inform and organize; and, yes, the teaching of Black history. The very laws and policies that sought to bring us closer together are being rapidly dismantled.

The fight for racial justice has never been won by laws alone. Legal rulings can declare rights, but they cannot enforce them. Legislation can assert equality, but it cannot guarantee justice. What makes racial justice victories real is the broader infrastructure that brings together the power and rights embodied in law, the enforcement mechanisms of both our laws and our social norms and customs, and the strength of communities to fight threats to their families and neighbors. This was the infrastructure that allowed Charles Hamilton Houston and other pioneers to lay the legal groundwork for Brown v. Board of Education. It was the infrastructure that allowed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to not just outlaw discriminatory voting practices, but also mobilize communities to claim their right to vote. It was the infrastructure that opened doors to education and economic opportunities that had long been denied to Black people. It is this infrastructure that continues to hold up communities around the country who are fighting against industrial projects that would pollute their air and transportation projects that threaten to flatten their homes.

Yet, this infrastructure—built over centuries—is fragile. Today, the news is full of stories about attacks on affirmative action,DEI and people of color who have managed to find some measure of success in traditionally white spaces. Legal decisions, particularly from Chief Justice John Roberts’ Supreme Court have undermined the effectiveness of laws such as the Voting Rights Act, which is responsible for broadly expanding the right to vote in the face of vicious restrictions on Black voting; and policies such as affirmative action in higher education, which has increased access to higher education for underrepresented racial and ethnic groups who face systemic barriers to education and admissions criteria that capture and magnify racial bias.

In many ways, this has always been the way of history. Progress has always been met with retrenchment. We take two steps forward, and then one step back. Yet throughout the country, activists, political leaders, lawyers, and everyday Americans are organizing to resist the retrenchment, as they have throughout American history. The infrastructure of racial justice is fragile, yes. But it is not broken. If we protect it, it will remain standing.

Published February 25, 2025 at 12:37AM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/OtAponu

ACLU: The Infrastructure of Racial Justice Is Under Attack. We Must Fight for It

The Infrastructure of Racial Justice Is Under Attack. We Must Fight for It

President Donald Trump began February with a proclamation that Black History Month offered “an occasion to celebrate the contributions of so many Black American patriots who have indelibly shaped our nation’s history.” In the closing days of the month, he hosted a Black History Month reception at the White House where he promised he would fight for Black Americans. What he did not mention during his remarks was that the proclamation and reception came amidst a systemic crusade to dismantle the civil rights infrastructure that Black Americans helped build and that sustains our hopes for equal citizenship.

One of the first moves Trump made after his inauguration was to issue a wide-ranging executive order ending the federal government’s diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs and firing the public servants who lead that work. He has moved to end affirmative action programs in federal procurement. He has threatened colleges and universities, intimidated non-profit organizations, and removed Black and women leaders from the nation’s military leadership.

Across the country, Black History Month proceeded against the backdrop of relentless attempts to erase Black history. Enemies of justice have sought to erase history so that past injustices cannot be connected to present inequities. Those who fear racial equality have always understood the importance of silencing stories that give people the hope and the means to build a better future. This whitewashing is a clear and present danger to an inclusive democracy. If Americans do not reflect on slavery’s enduring legacy, on Reconstruction and its violent backlash, on Jim Crow and its transformation into modern mass incarceration, then they cannot fully understand why racial injustice persists today and they will not be equipped to fight it. Now, with President Trump in office, the wind is at their back as he and his allies attempt to bludgeon Black history and Black futures at the highest levels.

But this is not just about how we study history. Much of American history can be understood as the struggle to build an infrastructure of racial justice. That includes the fight to end residential segregation and connect communities of color to opportunity, and the fight to pass and enforce laws like the Reconstruction amendments and the Civil Rights Movement-era laws that sought to move Black Americans closer to the American dream. What we are seeing today is a full-scale attack on that infrastructure; the deeply interconnected systems that make racial justice victories real. This infrastructure includes laws grounded in the 14th Amendment’s promise of equal protection under the law and the benefits of citizenship regardless of race; enforcement structures like the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission or the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice; pathways to upward mobility like the federal workforce; social norms that ensure fair treatment in businesses; the network of activists, educators, and journalists who inform and organize; and, yes, the teaching of Black history. The very laws and policies that sought to bring us closer together are being rapidly dismantled.

The fight for racial justice has never been won by laws alone. Legal rulings can declare rights, but they cannot enforce them. Legislation can assert equality, but it cannot guarantee justice. What makes racial justice victories real is the broader infrastructure that brings together the power and rights embodied in law, the enforcement mechanisms of both our laws and our social norms and customs, and the strength of communities to fight threats to their families and neighbors. This was the infrastructure that allowed Charles Hamilton Houston and other pioneers to lay the legal groundwork for Brown v. Board of Education. It was the infrastructure that allowed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to not just outlaw discriminatory voting practices, but also mobilize communities to claim their right to vote. It was the infrastructure that opened doors to education and economic opportunities that had long been denied to Black people. It is this infrastructure that continues to hold up communities around the country who are fighting against industrial projects that would pollute their air and transportation projects that threaten to flatten their homes.

Yet, this infrastructure—built over centuries—is fragile. Today, the news is full of stories about attacks on affirmative action,DEI and people of color who have managed to find some measure of success in traditionally white spaces. Legal decisions, particularly from Chief Justice John Roberts’ Supreme Court have undermined the effectiveness of laws such as the Voting Rights Act, which is responsible for broadly expanding the right to vote in the face of vicious restrictions on Black voting; and policies such as affirmative action in higher education, which has increased access to higher education for underrepresented racial and ethnic groups who face systemic barriers to education and admissions criteria that capture and magnify racial bias.

In many ways, this has always been the way of history. Progress has always been met with retrenchment. We take two steps forward, and then one step back. Yet throughout the country, activists, political leaders, lawyers, and everyday Americans are organizing to resist the retrenchment, as they have throughout American history. The infrastructure of racial justice is fragile, yes. But it is not broken. If we protect it, it will remain standing.

Published February 24, 2025 at 07:07PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/kbqmgae

ACLU: What Students Lose When School Becomes a Political Battleground

What Students Lose When School Becomes a Political Battleground

At the ACLU, we know that students’ First Amendment rights don’t disappear at the schoolhouse gates. However, the Trump administration is attempting to challenge this and other constitutional rights by forcing schools to teach a curriculum that aligns with its political agenda.

This radical abuse of executive power follows more than four years of similar censorship efforts at the state and local level that have restricted, or prohibited, instruction about American history, race and gender. Terms like “indoctrination” and “cultural Marxism” are often trotted out to justify banning content from BIPOC or queer authors, and about the Black experience and LGBTQ life. From the Oval Office to local school libraries, educational censorship efforts have direct impacts on how students across the country are learning about our world.

“How can I expect these kids to interact with me as a human being, or view me as one, when they aren't taught the history of anyone besides themselves?”

The ACLU's Youth Activism Research Collaborative asked students their thoughts on attempts to limit what they’re being taught in school. We surveyed 696 high school students from across the U.S and found that an overwhelming majority – 96 percent -- believe that a diverse education is critical. In spite of the massive support for a diverse education, not all students have access to curricula that uplift the realities of race, racism, sex and sexism in America. While 33 percent of students reported learning “a great deal” about racial injustice, 8 percent reported not learning it at all.

To better understand the content of what students were learning and how it impacts them, ACLU researchers and Youth Advisory Board members conducted a series of focus groups with 70 participants of the ACLU’s National Advocacy Institute. Some students indicated that their school either avoided discussions about race altogether or actively restricted content. They reported omissions of the experiences of Black Americans and other marginalized groups, and some noticed their teachers actively altering curriculum to comply with new state laws censoring the teaching of topics related to race. A student who went to school in Oklahoma noted, “...we were barely taught about the Trail of Tears that went directly through [my city], we were barely taught...to talk about the Tulsa race massacre, even though it happened 50 miles up the road from us. It was just a lot of omissions."

Twenty-nine percent of students surveyed noted efforts to restrict what content could be taught by educators, and 31 percent said attempts had been made to limit what could be discussed during class. One Florida student experienced the complexity of navigating education about race in a state with a classroom censorship law: “Some of my teachers wouldn’t have been able to support students in those types of conversations [about immigration and culture] anyway, but they were also prohibited from having them and could literally lose their jobs."

In some cases, students spoke positively about teachers proactively incorporating content about race, culture, and injustices into the curriculum in ways that fostered awareness and critical thinking. For example, a student from Montana shared that their teacher "encouraged dialogue in his classroom about the history of Latin American cultures, about imperialism, and the intersection of different cultures.” When discussing a book with a Mexican protagonist, one California student noted that "it's honestly, it's really, really transformative seeing a book where the author identifies with you and...the characters ... makes sense to you because they're going through the same things you're going through.”

“…we have full on bookshelves with caution tape on them. You can't read any of the books that are on them. We had teachers having to change their curriculum.”

More often teachers’ inclusion was described as too limited and selective, particularly with respect to Indigenous history, colonization, slavery, and the Civil Rights Movement. For example, a North Carolina student described their school’s teaching of racial justice history and racism as insufficient and an inaccurate representation of reality, stating “I don't really remember going into a lot of depth in school. It was like there was slavery and then racism and segregation, and then we ‘solved it, hooray.’” Several students also mentioned that teachers tend to highlight skewed perspectives on historical events and figures. A BIPOC Montana student indicated that though she had personally sought out information herself, she reported that many of her classmates, “have learned nothing beyond Martin Luther King's most diluted catchphrases. They hadn't learned anything about racism or racial violence, which really upset me.” She asked, “How can I expect these kids to interact with me as a human being, or view me as one, when they aren't taught the history of anyone besides themselves?”

In some cases, students described teachers’ attempts to address race as actively harmful, either because the teachers failed to fully understand the issues or they expressed discriminatory viewpoints. For example, a student described an advisor who addressed race as “not really important.” Similarly, another student said the teachers’ inclusions were “surface level” and lacking “heart.” Among the educators who dedicated time to the issue in the curriculum, some did so in misguided and or hurtful ways. One student shared their teacher’s attempt to teach about the realities of slavery, “he essentially did an exercise when we pretended that we were enslaved people and you were hiding throughout the school...There was one African American student in the class and ... I felt like it was hard for him probably to speak up. At the time I was like, why? ... what are we even learning from this?”

Racial Justice Education Study - Methods

Source: American Civil Liberties Union

Some students indicated that teachers were silent on topics like race unless the students brought it up themselves, placing an unfair burden on students. As one student expressed, "I am here to learn. I'm not here to teach.” One student from Colorado took the initiative to suggest reading materials that center Asian characters to their Language Arts teacher and faced pushback: “My white teachers didn't talk about the fact that...a book about an Asian character didn't talk about race. ... [But] at least I knew that 30 kids were told to read it and that they could have had that perspective."

Students have also experienced bans on books and other education materials: 20 percent of high school students surveyed reported efforts to ban or remove books from their school libraries, while 16 percent reported efforts to prohibit certain books or reading materials in classrooms. That same Florida student described the lengths their school has gone to implement these policies: “…we have full on bookshelves with caution tape on them. You can't read any of the books that are on them. We had teachers having to change their curriculum.” A Texas student complained that their "school libraries were being removed and turned into ‘detention’ centers for students." These bans didn’t only effect books and curriculum: an Indiana student noted that “a teacher was made to take down their own classroom decorations that were deemed radical.”

Even if the censorship efforts are not successful, they may still limit students and teachers’ constitutional rights. As one student explained: "I think it makes teachers who would be willing to talk about issues that are even the slightest this controversial even more hesitant...Why discuss it if there might be a problem? So then you're ending up with no actual written restrictions, but just the general atmosphere of fear."

The survey suggests that far from being indoctrinated, students are hungry for more information about race and culture in the classroom, and they are eager for teachers to engage with their identities and histories in more tangible ways. As efforts at classroom censorship go national, it is critical that educators, administrators, and policymakers remember who loses when our histories and classrooms are politicized. Students are telling us that a lack of access to diverse, inclusive, and accurate curricula is damaging their education – and the first step to changing that is listening to them.

Students may be able to start banned book clubs and organize protests, but they shouldn’t have to do it alone. We all have a part to play to ensure that every student has the right to learn.

This research was conducted by members of ACLU's Youth Activism Research Collaborative: Emily Greytak and Sham Habteselasse, ACLU; Laura Wray-Lake, UCLA; and Elan Hope, Policy Research Associates; former ACLU interns Jada Cheek and Sunny Sun, and members of the Youth Advisory Board: Alan Flores, QIn Kramer, Valery Lenti-Navarro, Alexandra Miranda, Julia Squiterri and Khadijah Zahid. Lastly, we are grateful for the students who participated in this study, sharing their perspectives and experiences.

Published February 21, 2025 at 12:37AM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/3XPiHF8

ACLU: What Students Lose When School Becomes a Political Battleground

What Students Lose When School Becomes a Political Battleground

At the ACLU, we know that students’ First Amendment rights don’t disappear at the schoolhouse gates. However, the Trump administration is attempting to challenge this and other constitutional rights by forcing schools to teach a curriculum that aligns with its political agenda.

This radical abuse of executive power follows more than four years of similar censorship efforts at the state and local level that have restricted, or prohibited, instruction about American history, race and gender. Terms like “indoctrination” and “cultural Marxism” are often trotted out to justify banning content from BIPOC or queer authors, and about the Black experience and LGBTQ life. From the Oval Office to local school libraries, educational censorship efforts have direct impacts on how students across the country are learning about our world.

“How can I expect these kids to interact with me as a human being, or view me as one, when they aren't taught the history of anyone besides themselves?”

The ACLU's Youth Activism Research Collaborative asked students their thoughts on attempts to limit what they’re being taught in school. We surveyed 696 high school students from across the U.S and found that an overwhelming majority – 96 percent -- believe that a diverse education is critical. In spite of the massive support for a diverse education, not all students have access to curricula that uplift the realities of race, racism, sex and sexism in America. While 33 percent of students reported learning “a great deal” about racial injustice, 8 percent reported not learning it at all.

To better understand the content of what students were learning and how it impacts them, ACLU researchers and Youth Advisory Board members conducted a series of focus groups with 70 participants of the ACLU’s National Advocacy Institute. Some students indicated that their school either avoided discussions about race altogether or actively restricted content. They reported omissions of the experiences of Black Americans and other marginalized groups, and some noticed their teachers actively altering curriculum to comply with new state laws censoring the teaching of topics related to race. A student who went to school in Oklahoma noted, “...we were barely taught about the Trail of Tears that went directly through [my city], we were barely taught...to talk about the Tulsa race massacre, even though it happened 50 miles up the road from us. It was just a lot of omissions."

Twenty-nine percent of students surveyed noted efforts to restrict what content could be taught by educators, and 31 percent said attempts had been made to limit what could be discussed during class. One Florida student experienced the complexity of navigating education about race in a state with a classroom censorship law: “Some of my teachers wouldn’t have been able to support students in those types of conversations [about immigration and culture] anyway, but they were also prohibited from having them and could literally lose their jobs."

In some cases, students spoke positively about teachers proactively incorporating content about race, culture, and injustices into the curriculum in ways that fostered awareness and critical thinking. For example, a student from Montana shared that their teacher "encouraged dialogue in his classroom about the history of Latin American cultures, about imperialism, and the intersection of different cultures.” When discussing a book with a Mexican protagonist, one California student noted that "it's honestly, it's really, really transformative seeing a book where the author identifies with you and...the characters ... makes sense to you because they're going through the same things you're going through.”

“…we have full on bookshelves with caution tape on them. You can't read any of the books that are on them. We had teachers having to change their curriculum.”

More often teachers’ inclusion was described as too limited and selective, particularly with respect to Indigenous history, colonization, slavery, and the Civil Rights Movement. For example, a North Carolina student described their school’s teaching of racial justice history and racism as insufficient and an inaccurate representation of reality, stating “I don't really remember going into a lot of depth in school. It was like there was slavery and then racism and segregation, and then we ‘solved it, hooray.’” Several students also mentioned that teachers tend to highlight skewed perspectives on historical events and figures. A BIPOC Montana student indicated that though she had personally sought out information herself, she reported that many of her classmates, “have learned nothing beyond Martin Luther King's most diluted catchphrases. They hadn't learned anything about racism or racial violence, which really upset me.” She asked, “How can I expect these kids to interact with me as a human being, or view me as one, when they aren't taught the history of anyone besides themselves?”

In some cases, students described teachers’ attempts to address race as actively harmful, either because the teachers failed to fully understand the issues or they expressed discriminatory viewpoints. For example, a student described an advisor who addressed race as “not really important.” Similarly, another student said the teachers’ inclusions were “surface level” and lacking “heart.” Among the educators who dedicated time to the issue in the curriculum, some did so in misguided and or hurtful ways. One student shared their teacher’s attempt to teach about the realities of slavery, “he essentially did an exercise when we pretended that we were enslaved people and you were hiding throughout the school...There was one African American student in the class and ... I felt like it was hard for him probably to speak up. At the time I was like, why? ... what are we even learning from this?”

Racial Justice Education Study - Methods

Source: American Civil Liberties Union

Some students indicated that teachers were silent on topics like race unless the students brought it up themselves, placing an unfair burden on students. As one student expressed, "I am here to learn. I'm not here to teach.” One student from Colorado took the initiative to suggest reading materials that center Asian characters to their Language Arts teacher and faced pushback: “My white teachers didn't talk about the fact that...a book about an Asian character didn't talk about race. ... [But] at least I knew that 30 kids were told to read it and that they could have had that perspective."

Students have also experienced bans on books and other education materials: 20 percent of high school students surveyed reported efforts to ban or remove books from their school libraries, while 16 percent reported efforts to prohibit certain books or reading materials in classrooms. That same Florida student described the lengths their school has gone to implement these policies: “…we have full on bookshelves with caution tape on them. You can't read any of the books that are on them. We had teachers having to change their curriculum.” A Texas student complained that their "school libraries were being removed and turned into ‘detention’ centers for students." These bans didn’t only effect books and curriculum: an Indiana student noted that “a teacher was made to take down their own classroom decorations that were deemed radical.”

Even if the censorship efforts are not successful, they may still limit students and teachers’ constitutional rights. As one student explained: "I think it makes teachers who would be willing to talk about issues that are even the slightest this controversial even more hesitant...Why discuss it if there might be a problem? So then you're ending up with no actual written restrictions, but just the general atmosphere of fear."

The survey suggests that far from being indoctrinated, students are hungry for more information about race and culture in the classroom, and they are eager for teachers to engage with their identities and histories in more tangible ways. As efforts at classroom censorship go national, it is critical that educators, administrators, and policymakers remember who loses when our histories and classrooms are politicized. Students are telling us that a lack of access to diverse, inclusive, and accurate curricula is damaging their education – and the first step to changing that is listening to them.

Students may be able to start banned book clubs and organize protests, but they shouldn’t have to do it alone. We all have a part to play to ensure that every student has the right to learn.

This research was conducted by members of ACLU's Youth Activism Research Collaborative: Emily Greytak and Sham Habteselasse, ACLU; Laura Wray-Lake, UCLA; and Elan Hope, Policy Research Associates; former ACLU interns Jada Cheek and Sunny Sun, and members of the Youth Advisory Board: Alan Flores, QIn Kramer, Valery Lenti-Navarro, Alexandra Miranda, Julia Squiterri and Khadijah Zahid. Lastly, we are grateful for the students who participated in this study, sharing their perspectives and experiences.

Published February 20, 2025 at 07:07PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/Di73BxN