The Jan. 21 decision by the U.S. Department of Education [DOE] to drop its appeal of the federal court rulings that blocked its efforts to penalize schools and colleges for having DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) programs is a significant victory for DEI advocates.
The Aug. 14, 2025 federal court decision found that the department of education “guidance” violated procedural rules and the First Amendment.
The DOE guidance labeled many traditional DEI practices as potentially unlawful race-based discrimination, aggressively interpreted federal anti-discrimination laws in that light, and threatened federal funding for schools that didn’t comply.
This victory is not just a small procedural win; it removes the serious threat of economic punishment against higher education institutions imperiling their right to self-government regarding their curricula, faculty, staff, and students.
However, serious damage to DEI programs and to higher education self-governance has already occurred. It is not easy to quantify the damage already caused to programs, morale, students, and academic freedom.
There isn’t a single official government tally of how many U.S. colleges and universities have ended or renamed their DEI programs, but reports from various higher education organizations provide useful estimates based on tracking institutional actions.
A survey reported by The College Fix, a conservative conservative-leaning news website and campus journalism platform, found that around 78 colleges and universities appeared to have actually closed their DEI offices and did not launch similar renamed units. The same survey identified that around 87 schools have renamed or rebranded their DEI offices (often with titles like “inclusive excellence,” “access,” or “community engagement”) rather than eliminating them outright.
A monitoring project by the nonprofit Defending Education documented 18 universities that have removed webpages and/or shut down DEI initiatives and about 29 that appear to have renamed or rebranded their DEI offices in a dataset covering a subset of about 262 institutions.
National reporting has cited “hundreds of campuses” where DEI programs have disappeared or been rebranded amid political and legal pressures. For example, a PBS NewsHour piece noted that more than 400 campuses have seen programs vanish or be renamed.
In spite of these serious damages, the decision by the department of education to drop its appeal solidifies the federal courts’ rejection of the anti-DEI enforcement strategy.
With the appeal dropped, the lower court’s decision stands as the final word for now, meaning the DOE cannot pursue that strategy through the appeals process. Inside Higher Education called this a “major victory” and even the “final defeat” of that particular legal push against DEI.
Because the appeal is gone, the legal block on threatening to cut funding remains in place. DEI programs are not being dismantled by federal enforcement under this legal theory at this time, which is a tangible win for supporters.
First Amendment and higher-ed groups emphasized that this outcome strengthens the position of institutions and advocates pushing back against what they viewed as unlawful overreach.
The Broader Legal and Policy Context Is Still Mixed
It’s important to understand the limits of this victory, however.
This doesn’t end all legal efforts to restrict DEI. Other executive actions and lawsuits (including some involving executive orders and grant conditions) are still ongoing or have different legal foundations. Some federal policy changes (like the revocation of long-standing affirmative-action requirements for federal contractors) remain in effect or are being litigated separately.
While the broader policy debate over DEI continues, this decision is a clear victory for higher education communities that view inclusive programs as essential to enriching the campus environment, supporting underrepresented students, and fostering equitable opportunity. By preserving the legal protections for DEI practices, the ruling ensures that colleges can maintain these efforts without fear of losing federal support under the now-blocked guidance.
2026 © nicholas.patricca@gmail.com
Nick Patricca is professor emeritus at Loyola University Chicago, active member of the Dramatists Guild of America, member of PEN International San Miguel MX Center.