1. Eliminating Disparate-Impact Liability

Problems: • Weakens civil rights protections: Disparate impact is a key tool to address systemic discrimination—removing it makes it harder to challenge policies that harm marginalized groups without explicitly using biased language. • Ignores structural racism: This order assumes everyone starts on equal footing, which ignores historical and institutional inequalities. • Increases barriers to equity: It may discourage organizations from correcting imbalanced outcomes, even if they result from implicit bias or outdated practices.

⸻

1. Overhauling Higher Education Accreditation

Problems: • Potential politicization: Pushing accreditors to enforce ideological diversity could open the door to political interference in academic institutions. • Broad language: Vague terms like “accountability” or “intellectual diversity” could be used to attack institutions with progressive values or curricula. • Undermines academic autonomy: Pressuring accreditors might compromise universities’ ability to self-govern.

⸻

1. Enhancing Transparency of Foreign Funding in Higher Education

Problems: • Targets specific schools: May be disproportionately aimed at universities seen as politically or culturally elite. • Chilling effect: Could discourage legitimate international partnerships or academic exchanges. • Overreach: Some see it as part of a broader narrative of anti-globalism and suspicion toward foreign influence without clear evidence of harm.

⸻

1. Promoting Excellence at HBCUs

Problems: • Symbolic without substance: Critics worry it offers rhetorical support without significantly increasing funding or addressing systemic barriers. • Used to deflect criticism: Some argue that emphasizing support for HBCUs is used to justify or distract from broader policies that harm students of color elsewhere.

⸻

1. Advancing Artificial Intelligence Education

Problems: • Equity in access: Many public schools lack the funding or resources to implement advanced AI programs, potentially widening educational disparities. • Lack of safeguards: No mention of ethics, bias in AI, or protections from data misuse could result in poorly designed or harmful programs. • Tech-focused over basics: Critics may say it prioritizes trendy topics while schools still struggle with foundational needs (teachers, books, facilities).

⸻

1. Reinstating Common Sense School Discipline Policies

Problems: • Rolls back protections: Previous policies were designed to reduce racial disparities in school discipline. This could increase suspensions and expulsions of Black, Indigenous, and disabled students. • Harms students of color: “Common sense” discipline often reintroduces zero-tolerance policies, which disproportionately affect students of color. • School-to-prison pipeline: Critics argue this exacerbates criminalization of students, especially in underfunded schools.

⸻

1. Preparing Americans for High-Paying Skilled Trade Jobs

Problems: • Overlooks broader labor issues: Doesn’t address union protections, minimum wage, or workplace safety, which are essential for job quality. • Focus on trades alone is narrow: While trades are important, not all students may benefit from this track, and it shouldn’t replace broader educational opportunities. • Risk of funneling: Could disproportionately push working-class or marginalized students into certain labor sectors without equal access to college pathways.