The University of Missouri has yanked sponsorship from its Black, Latino, Asian, gay and marginalized student groups to comply with Trump administration policies.
Also known as Mizzou, the state’s flagship public campus cited the need to align with a Department of Justice threat to withhold federal subsidies from universities that sponsor diversity, equity and inclusion programming.
Mizzou’s decision ends a direct stream of “designated funding” to five groups: the Legion of Black Collegians, the Association of Latin American Students, the Asian American Association, the Queer Liberation Front and the Four Front Marginalized Student Council.
“In the past, Mizzou allocated a portion of its student fees to fund certain affinity-based student organizations,” university spokesman Christopher Ave said Tuesday in an email. “These practices must be discontinued to align with federal law as outlined in the memo.”
Starting in July, the five groups must apply for funding each year like any other undergraduate group, ending the university’s commitment to keep them running perpetually with dedicated student fees.
Mr. Ave cited language in a Justice Department memo that declared it unlawful for any institution receiving federal student aid or research grants to use “race, sex, or other protected characteristics for … resource allocation, or other similar activities, opportunities, or benefits.”
He also noted that the memo’s interpretation of illegal segregation bars colleges from organizing “programs, activities, or resources … in a way that separates or restricts access based on protected characteristics.”
The Washington Times contacted the five student groups for comment.
“While we understand the importance of protecting the university, it comes at the cost of removing protections for minority students by diminishing the visibility for their communities and valued spaces on campus,” said Chelsea Trieu, an executive officer with the Asian American Association.
Amaya Morgan, president of the Legion of Black Collegians, predicted the decision would dramatically reduce her group’s $63,000 annual budget as it competes against 600 other student groups for funds.
“It’s about our community,” said Ms. Morgan, a junior double major in journalism and film studies. “Without the funding, we won’t be able to adequately serve minority students on a predominantly White campus.”
Mia Ramirez, vice president of the Association of Latin American Students, predicted that students would rally behind the groups.
“We will continue to do everything we can to protect our students, since the university has clearly refused to do so,” she said. “Our voices will not be silenced, and our culture will be known on this campus.”
An ever-growing number of marginalized student groups has enjoyed quasi-official sponsorship from U.S. colleges since the late 1960s. Democratic Party leaders have defended the system as essential to supporting historically underrepresented minorities in higher education.
Mizzou’s decision makes the Columbia campus the latest in a long list of schools capitulating to the Trump administration’s crackdown on the trend over the past year.
The Department of Education reported Tuesday that more than 300 colleges and universities have eliminated DEI requirements, closed DEI offices, removed diversity statements from hiring practices, and altered or removed DEI policies since Mr. Trump returned to office last year.
The federal agency cited Harvard, Ohio State, Northwestern, Purdue, Rutgers, Stanford, Iowa, Michigan, North Carolina, California, Vanderbilt and the University of Pennsylvania as “prominent examples.”
“In just over a year, the Trump administration has successfully impacted the culture in higher education for the better,” Education Department spokeswoman Amelia Joy said in an email. “We are excited to see institutions embrace these changes, prioritize fairness on campus, and help usher in the Golden Age of education.”
Jonathan Zimmerman, a Penn education historian, insisted the government should let schools decide how to spend federal subsidies on affinity groups.
“That should be up to the universities, not to the White House,” Mr. Zimmerman said.
Reached for comment, other higher education insiders offered divided opinions of Mizzou’s decision.
“It goes too far,” said Omekongo Dibinga, a professor of intercultural communications affiliated with American University’s Antiracist Research and Policy Center. “Just as you can reduce people to second-class citizenship status, they are reducing students to second-class students.”
Peter Wood, president of the conservative National Association of Scholars, hailed Mizzou’s announcement as “a valid and useful step” toward eliminating illegal favoritism for minority groups.
“The new structure will, in principle, require them to make a well-argued case for their continued funding,” said Mr. Wood, a former associate provost at Boston University. “But it is possible that this will be treated as a mere formality and the funding will continue without real examination of its legitimate warrant.”
• Sean Salai can be reached at ssalai@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.