Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI)

Diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) is a conceptual framework held by many organizations. It promotes the fair treatment and full participation of all individuals. DEI is increasingly under attack.

The Real Cost of Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ Is Just Beginning

PUBLISHED 11/9/2026 by , and

In July 2025, Republicans in Congress passed, and President Donald Trump signed, this administration’s signature piece of legislation: the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA).

In addition to directing unprecedented levels of funding toward the administration’s anti-immigrant detention and deportation agenda, the OBBBA slashed funding for programs that help people afford food, healthcare and education to pay for trillions of dollars in tax cuts that overwhelmingly benefit the wealthiest people and corporations.

And the worst is yet to come: The OBBBA was specifically designed to delay many of its harmful measures until after the November 2026 midterm elections—leaving millions of Americans bracing for the worst.

Ms. Magazine Wins Gold at the Anthem Awards for FEMINIST 250, a Celebration of the Women Who Shaped America

PUBLISHED 11/6/2026 by

Ms. is thrilled to announce that FEMINIST 250: Founding Feminists has won Gold in Special Projects, Belonging and Inclusion at the 2026 Anthem Awards.

Presented by the organization behind the prestigious Webby Awards, the Anthems are considered the premier international honors for social impact, recognizing the world’s most innovative and influential work advancing social change.

Launched during Women’s History Month to mark the nation’s 250th anniversary, FEMINIST 250: Founding Feminists is sweeping, beautifully illustrated collection of essays, historical research, art and multimedia storytelling that challenges the familiar story of America’s founding.

Among the project’s most compelling stories:
—In “Haudenosaunee Governance: The Matrilineal Democracy That Shaped America,” Michelle Schenandoah, a member of the Oneida Nation Wolf Clan, explores an Indigenous system of governance in which women have long held political, economic and spiritual authority—and whose democratic traditions influenced the United States.
—Historian Vanessa M. Holden’s “She Wanted to Be Free: Black Women’s Revolutionary Resistance” tells the story of Ona Judge, a woman enslaved by George and Martha Washington who escaped to freedom, and the countless other Black women who resisted slavery long before the nation’s founding ideals were extended to them.
—In “Queer Possibilities in Revolutionary America,” historian Jen Manion challenges the notion that transgender and gender-nonconforming people are a modern phenomenon. She uncovers the lives of people who defied gender expectations centuries before today’s language for LGBTQ+ identities existed.

… and more.

Texas Is Testing a Blueprint for Censoring Gender and Sexuality in Higher Education Nationwide

PUBLISHED 10/30/2026 by | UPDATED 11/9/2026 at 6:47 A.M. PT

I teach at a major research university in Texas, where higher education has become a testing ground for state censorship. Our censorship regime is led by Brandon Creighton, a former Texas state senator appointed chancellor by the Board of Regents. As a senator, Creighton authored the state’s sweeping anti-DEI law and legislation that increases political oversight of public institutions. He also authored or supported some of the Texas legislature’s most restrictive anti-LGBTQIA+ measures.

Now, as chancellor of the Texas Tech University System, which serves more than 65,000 students, Creighton has made clear that he wants our institution to model a new future for higher education nationally: one in which politically appointed regents exert greater control over what professors teach, and the study of gender and sexuality is sharply restricted.

Faculty, students and staff are the proving ground for that model. But they’re also pushing back: The restrictions are now being challenged in federal court by faculty organizations that argue they violate constitutional protections for free speech and academic freedom.

And now, post-midterm elections, Texas voters have elected Democrat Gina Hinojosa as governor, raising new questions about the future of the state’s sweeping restrictions on public education and academic freedom. Hinojosa campaigned heavily on education reform, and her administration could have significant influence over how Texas universities approach diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), faculty rights and the teaching of gender and sexuality. Hinojosa will have the opportunity to appoint new university regents, beginning with 20 whose terms expire in 2027, and replace the state’s higher education ombudsman.

The Campus Free Speech Crisis We Don’t Talk About

PUBLISHED 10/19/2026 by

It’s not often that an article in a college newspaper becomes national news, but an explosive oped titled “Cornell Won’t, We Will,” has sparked front-page headlines, protests and demands for accountability across the country since its publication in The Cornell Daily Sun on Sept. 21. Authored by the newspaper’s editorial board, the piece highlighted the alleged gang rape of a female student, identified as Jane Doe, by members of the Chi Phi fraternity in October 2024. The op-ed denounced not only the actions of the alleged perpetrators but also what it described as the inaction of Cornell University in response to them.

The authors accused the university of failing to provide transparency and accountability in the wake of Doe’s assault, calling it part of a “morbid pattern” of institutional indifference to campus sexual assault. Despite a finding by Cornell’s own task force that incidents of sexual assault had increased by roughly 40 percent between 2023 and 2025, Cornell had provided “no concrete, feasible solutions beyond the usual passivities of ‘communication’ and ‘understanding.’” The editors argued that the failure to protect the physical safety of students constituted a betrayal of Cornell’s promise to “preserve a higher education community and residential campus where ‘any person’ in the community can pursue their education in a secure and nourishing environment.”

Just over a week later, another op-ed by a Cornell student criticizing the institution reached a national audience. “Cornell Fails Its Free-Speech Test,” authored by Cornell senior Jared Lederman, ran in the Wall Street Journal on Sept. 29. Lederman’s op-ed cited his recent personal experience of being criticized by fellow Cornell students for his views on gender equality as a demonstration of the university’s “culture of intolerance.”

Lederman recounts that after publishing an online essay titled “Men and Women Were Not Created Equal,” which condemned “modern feminism” for “trying to suppress masculinity” and insufficiently appreciating the “irreplaceable beauty in a woman creating the home to which her husband returns and in which her children grow,” his professional fraternity asked him to resign from a leadership position and his social fraternity expelled him. According to Lederman, his experience of “exile” is proof that “expressing heterodox views is socially suicidal” at Cornell, despite the institution’s claims in a recent report to value “‘rigorous deliberation and engaged discourse.’”

The gulf between these two op-eds speaks volumes about what is perceived as a campus crisis, not only at Cornell but across the country.

Sexual abuse is a free speech issue. A campus where students are pressured to stay silent about abuse, where students are doxxed, threatened and swatted for filing complaints, where victims are forced to share classrooms and living spaces with their abusers, is not a campus that respects physical safety or free speech.

Healthcare, Jobs and Equality: The Feminist Stakes of the Midterms

PUBLISHED 10/19/2026 by and

Federal policies shape women’s lives across the country—in our workplaces, schools, healthcare systems and homes, in red and blue states alike.

For example, federal workforce reductions undermine economic security and career opportunities for Black women, who have historically constituted a substantial share of the federal workforce. Restrictions on federal funding for reproductive healthcare also weaken access to contraception and cancer screenings. And of course, the unresolved status of the Equal Rights Amendment remains an unfinished chapter in the struggle for women’s equality.

These issues are not abstract. They affect whether a woman can obtain healthcare, whether a teacher has the resources to support her students, and whether an employee can challenge discrimination.

Gloria Steinem reminded women, “Voting isn’t the most we can do, but it is the least. To have a democracy, you have to want one.” Let’s also remember that women have been a majority of the electorate for the past two decades. When it comes down to tough choices, voters must demand America gets it priorities straight. After all, as Steinem asked bluntly: “Who needs a ballroom?”

How Can Feminists Advance Racial Equity in a Post-DEI World? Join Book Talk With Ralina L. Joseph [Sept. 10 @ Ms. HQ in LA]

PUBLISHED 9/2/2026 by

As attacks on diversity, equity and inclusion intensify across the U.S., how can feminists deepen their commitment to racial justice—and sustain that work without succumbing to exhaustion?

On Thursday, Sept. 10, at 6 p.m., Ms. will welcome author and scholar Ralina L. Joseph for a special evening examining the interconnectedness of race, equity and feminism. Joseph will discuss her new book, Racial Exhaustion: How to Move Through Racism in the Wake of DEI, in conversation with Sarah Banet-Weiser, dean of the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania.

The event is at Ms. magazine headquarters: 433 S. Beverly Drive, Beverly Hills, Calif. RSVP today!

Another Blow to Women’s Equality at Work: The Trump Administration Is Trying to Weaken a Key Workplace Discrimination Protection

PUBLISHED 8/6/2026 by

The Trump administration is attempting to weaken one of the nation’s most important workplace discrimination protections—a legal standard that has, for decades, allowed workers to challenge hiring and promotion policies that unfairly exclude qualified people, even when those policies appear neutral on their face.

A new opinion from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), issued in June, argues these longstanding interpretations of Title VII’s “disparate-impact” standard are unconstitutional, and contends certain Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidance improperly allows employers to be held liable based on discriminatory effects rather than intent. The opinion is meant to guide executive branch enforcement.

Civil rights advocates are pushing back, arguing the new OLC opinion misstates decades of Supreme Court precedent and congressional action.

Below is a joint explainer—issued by the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC), Democracy Forward, the Legal Defense Fund (LDF), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Asian Americans Advancing Justice (AAJC), Equal Rights Advocates, and LatinoJustice PRLDEF—originally published as “The Office of Legal Counsel’s Opinion on the ‘Constitutionality of Disparate-Impact Liability Under Title VII’: What You Need to Know.”

The organizations argue that the opinion does not change federal law. Instead, they emphasize that only Congress can amend Title VII and that courts—not the executive branch—determine how the law is interpreted. Employers, they say, remain legally obligated to comply with existing anti-discrimination protections.

“Across America, workers are struggling to find living-wage jobs to support themselves and their families. Too often, qualified workers are blocked from getting hired and promoted due to employer policies that screen out applicants based on factors unrelated to whether the applicant could do the job, from unnecessary college degree requirements and credit checks to commute-radius limitations and AI resume reviews. The Trump-Vance administration is making this problem worse.

“For decades, under Supreme Court precedent, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), and other legal authority, workers have been able to challenge exclusionary policies like these using a legal tool known as “disparate-impact liability.” That tool has resulted in employers adopting more thoughtful, rigorous standards in evaluating their own selection criteria and advancing their business objectives. The administration is now attacking this tool, encouraging employers to ignore the harms caused by their own policies while denying workers the ability to question whether those policies are justified and fair.

“In its latest move, the Trump-Vance administration’s Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) released an opinion claiming that longstanding U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guidance on disparate-impact liability under Title VII is unconstitutional. The OLC opinion is wrong on the facts and wrong on the law. Only Congress and the courts have authority to change the law or its impact.”

How the Manhattan Institute Turned Anti-LGBTQ+ Politics Into Conservative Policy

PUBLISHED 6/21/2026 by

The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, best known as a Reaganomics champion, is using anti-LGBTQ+ politics to advance its broader political goals. But that wasn’t always part of its strategy.

Since its founding nearly 50 years ago, MI has influenced conservative policy by crafting model legislation and publishing reports for lawmakers and lobbyists. Some of its longtime goals have included promoting libertarian economic policies, discrediting teachers unions and deregulating healthcare. Funded primarily by conservatives on Wall Street, MI has over $30 million in net assets as of its most recent tax filings.

Prior to the 2020s, efforts to undermine LGBTQ+ rights were not a focus for MI. But since then, it began parroting many of the talking points of the anti-LGBTQ+ movement.

While the shift may seem random, an assessment of MI’s history and strategy reveals how these attacks fit into its broader political goals.

America’s Medical Research System Has Been Failing Women for Generations

PUBLISHED 6/11/2026 by and

For decades, women have been systematically excluded, overlooked and underfunded by America’s scientific and medical institutions—and the consequences are measurable. Women were not required to be included in federally funded clinical research until 1993, and even today, no more than 8.8 percent of NIH grant spending goes toward women’s health research. The result is a dangerous knowledge gap that affects everything from cardiovascular disease and autoimmune disorders to drug safety, maternal health and reproductive care.

The problem transcends partisan politics. While the Trump administration’s cuts to women’s health research have intensified concerns, Democratic and Republican administrations alike have failed to prioritize women’s health.

Private philanthropy and venture capital have also fallen short, with women’s health receiving just a fraction of available funding.

As women face rising healthcare deserts, worsening maternal mortality rates and persistent gaps in diagnosis and treatment, meaningful progress will require action on every front—from federal investment and philanthropy to innovative new funding models focused specifically on women’s health research.

Three Ways Trump’s Weird Fixation on DEI Is Hurting Women

PUBLISHED 5/28/2026 by

The Trump administration’s obsession with diversity, equity and inclusion has moved far beyond rhetoric. It is now reshaping how women’s stories get told, whose health crises are allowed to be named, and what kinds of research are permitted to survive.

Across history, healthcare and science, women are watching decades of hard-fought progress become collateral damage in a culture war designed to erase people in real time.

That damage is already visible.

Republicans derailed long-awaited progress on the American Women’s History Museum by inserting provisions policing which women count as women and handing Trump appointees sweeping control over the museum itself.

Meanwhile, the newly reintroduced Momnibus legislation—created in response to the maternal mortality crisis devastating Black women and families—has been forced to strip much of the word “Black” from its language in order to survive politically under an administration openly hostile to DEI initiatives.

And the consequences are not abstract: NIH grants focused on women’s health have reportedly dropped by 30 percent, while words like “women” and “gender” themselves are becoming liabilities in funding proposals.

Women’s health was already chronically underfunded and misunderstood long before Trump returned to office. But the administration’s escalating war on DEI is accelerating that neglect—and making clear just how much is at stake when political ideology begins dictating whose lives deserve to be studied, protected and remembered.