Trump’s White House Turns Its Laser Focus to Solving “Reverse Racism” in Higher Ed

Yesterday, the New York Times obtained documents indicating that the Trump administration is working to “redirect resources of the Justice Department’s civil rights division toward investigating and suing universities over affirmative action admissions policies deemed to discriminate against white applicants.” In the midst of almost too many domestic scandals and legal investigations to count, unceasing staff shakeups that one would imagine to have brought White House operations almost to a standstill, and various international crises requiring the White House’s comment or reaction, the administration has its sights set on making sure the Abigail Fishers of the world face as few obstacles as possible between them and not showing up to their 8 am composition seminar.

There hasn’t been an official announcement of this initiative; what we do have is an internal communication asking for lawyers to volunteer for a project related to “investigations and possible litigation related to intentional race-based discrimination in college and university admissions.” It’s not entirely clear yet what this initiative will look like, although we seem set to find out relatively soon — applicants are supposed to submit their résumés by August 9th — but given the Justice Department’s enthusiasm for dropping or reversing positions held by the Obama administration in regards to cases involving discrimination, it isn’t likely to be good. It’s especially concerning alongside the fact that as part of the sweeping cuts the Trump administration has proposed from its outset, the Education Department’s Office of Civil Rights was meant to see major staffing cuts. From the New York Times:

In a lawsuit challenging Texas’ strict voter identification law, the Justice Department switched its position, dropping the claim that the law was intentionally discriminatory and later declaring that the law had been fixed. Mr. Sessions has also made clear he is not interested in using consent decrees to impose reforms on troubled police departments and has initiated a sweeping review of existing agreements. Last week, the Justice Department, without being asked, filed a brief in a private employment discrimination lawsuit. It urged an appeals court not to interpret the ban on sex-based discrimination in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as covering sexual orientation.

Of course, the “problem” of discrimination against white students applying to universities that this project claims to attempt to address does not exist. In fact, white women are the group who has benefited most from affirmative action policies as a whole. Even if they weren’t, the fact of the matter is that white people can’t be disadvantaged by a system of higher education that was designed by and for them — a system which was only recently in American history forced to consider people of color as potential members of its academic and cultural community at all and still rarely reflects or serves them in a meaningful way in terms of curriculum. Unfortunately, as is generally the case, these facts don’t matter; neither the Abigail Fishers of the world nor the Trump administration can or will be swayed by facts about the structural realities of the US’s past and present.

This initiative isn’t based in a misunderstanding of the facts, but an attempt to recreate them; not being duped by a narrative about what white people are entitled to, but cheerfully shaping it. The strategy of a fearmongering far right in the US (and in a broader historical sense, the strategy of white supremacy) has long been to suggest the existence of terrifying problems that they can then be relied upon to solve. The Trump administration is taking up this ancient tradition with bureaucracy and tax dollars; in lieu of doing any of the work of governing our fractured and fraught nation, it can continue creating offices and departments to address the imaginary concerns of frightened white people.

Much like the office of “Victims Of Immigration Crime Engagement, or VOICE,” — again created to publicly oppose a problem that it again feels deeply absurd to have to point out obviously does not exist — this move is an attempt to cash a fake check to Trump’s voters. Trump can’t bring back jobs because the jobs don’t exist anymore; he can’t build his wall because he never had a plan for it in the first place; he can’t lock up Hillary Clinton; he can’t put together even a marginally workable idea for what healthcare should look like. All he can do for them is create imaginary solutions to the imaginary problems he reassured them really existed.

Unfortunately, the extensive reverse-racism LARPing that the Trump administration is doing may well have real consequences for real people, despite its basis in total fallacy. Although the Supreme Court upheld the affirmative action program at University of Texas last year, there are several more pending lawsuits against other universities for similar programs, and it’s entirely possible that Trump’s Justice Department will issue guidance or otherwise weigh in on them. It’s hard to say what exactly this new civil rights department project could potentially accomplish; even if they never manage to do more than write memos, however, the Trump administration has been looking to cut funding to the DOJ’s Civil Rights Department since the inauguration.

Any of the limited resources being spent on this project are being taken away from actual civil rights work, to the extent that there was any chance of it being accomplished under this administration in the first place.

Rachel is Autostraddle's Managing Editor and the editor who presides over news & politics coverage. Originally from Boston, MA, Rachel now lives in the Midwest. Topics dear to her heart include bisexuality, The X-Files and tacos. Her favorite Ciara video is probably "Ride," but if you're only going to watch one, she recommends "Like A Boy." You can follow her on twitter and instagram.

Rachel has written 1113 articles for us.

11 Comments

  1. Ugh! Thank you for keeping us updated, Rachel.

    From what I can see as a grad student (and sometimes TA/instructor), higher education does have its problems, but discrimination against white people is definitely not one of them! I hope this does not worsen the campus climate that was tense enough last year and the year before.

  2. WTF?? And here I was, thinking how fantastic that the undergrad class at my alma mater is now 54% women of color. (Note, this is a women’s college. Who wants to bet women’s colleges will be the next thing to disappear in higher education?)

  3. Well he is close to Alex Jones, Gorka, Miller, and Bannon. I suppose this was the next logical step. Infowars heavily pushes the ‘White genocide’ agenda. And all of those men subscribe to it. These are scary times indeed. The backwardness that the world is facing is insane. I mean we live in a time where I get called “slurs” for believing that the world is a sphere. Wtf is happening….

  4. i would just like to say i got into UT and abigail fisher did not and it’s because i’m smarter than her.

    this has got to be one of the most wasteful use of government resources ever. ?

  5. I’m so exhausted and disgusted and sickened by this administration. And while I do want to know wtf happened with Russia, it’s these kind of changes and policies that are really hurting people, and no one knows that they’re happening. Every time Trump tweets some ignorant dribble, we’re distracted from important and harmful stuff the government is trying to do. Thank you for writing this article, and thank you for giving me the phrase, “reverse-racism LARPing.”

  6. I had to come back to review this article after a frustrating conversation at work. A coworker and I were commiserating about this move by Tr**p. (Your analysis stuck with me. Srsly)
    After a few minutes, my boss comes up and agrees
    —Tr**p is horrible…
    — This policy is wrong
    — but she knows a boys who was barely Native American and got into every school he applied to.

    I’m guessing u can imagine my frustration. How can u respond to this anecdotal bullshit?!? I took a breath and asked her if she thought Tr**p was right. She immediately said NO. She loathes him. I know she does.

    She wasn’t defending him. But there’s an overlap in their worldview that delusional and dangerous.

    Any thoughts on rhetorical tools for these kinds of situations?

    Clearly, her response is rooted I her privilege and sense of entitlement. She’s well off. Her youngest daughter is about to graduate from a pricey private high school. And of course she’s my boss, but like a cool boss, the way Phil’s a cool dad on Modern Family.

    In short it’s complicated, but I want to do the work. I think it’s essential but, at the same time, I don’t want to fuck it up.

  7. Affirmative Action is such a frightening issue because that slop isn’t just slippery, it’s a ski jump. Every single minority would face discrimination in housing, employment, just every fucking thing possible. It would effect a lot of white people who aren’t otherwise a minority too just because they wouldn’t be the right “class” or know the right people.

    On the flip side it’s not as though we ever lived in a post-discriminatory society and even with laws on the books, what amounts to Jim Crow has persisted and never improved in many places.

    It’s just fucked. It’s always been fucked. I don’t know if it’s going to get unfucked in my lifetime in any significant way.

Contribute to the conversation...

You must be logged in to post a comment.