DEI policies

Subterms

    Latest story

    150 Shares15 Views

    Director of National Portrait Gallery resigns after Trump’s effort to fire her

    by

    The director of the National Portrait Gallery, Kim Sajet, has resigned just two weeks after Donald Trump attempted to fire her and accused her of being “highly partisan and a strong supporter of DEI”.“We thank Kim for her service. Her decision to put the museum first is to be applauded and appreciated. I know this was not an easy decision. She put the needs of the Institution above her own, and for that we thank her,” Lonnie Bunch, the Smithsonian secretary, wrote in a Friday internal email that was obtained by multiple outlets.“We are grateful to Kim for leading the National Portrait Gallery with passion and creativity for 12 years. Throughout her tenure, she has reimagined and reshaped the impact and storytelling of portraiture.”The announcement comes after the Smithsonian Institution earlier this week rebuffed Trump’s attempt to fire Sajet, with the museum’s governing board asserting its independence and turning away the president’s claim of authority over the institution’s staffing.Trump announced on 30 May that he had fired Sajet, calling her a “highly partisan person, and a strong supporter of DEI, which is totally inappropriate for her position”.His attack focused, among other reasons, on her Democratic political donations and her rejection of a pro-Trump painting by artist Julian Raven. Sajet reportedly told Raven his artwork was “too pro-Trump” and “too political” for the gallery, the artist told the Washingtonian in 2019.In a statement on Monday, the Smithsonian’s board of regents declared that “all personnel decisions are made by and subject to the direction of the secretary, with oversight by the board”. The statement did not name Sajet or mention the Trump administration directly.Following Trump’s announcement, Sajet continued reporting to work throughout early June, creating a direct confrontation between the White House and the Smithsonian Institution – the country’s flagship cultural institution that has a 178-year-old governance structure built against political interference.Appointed in 2013, Sajet became the National Portrait Gallery’s first female director. Kevin Gover, undersecretary for museums and culture, has replaced her as acting director of the museum.In a statement shared by the internal memo on Friday, Sajet said it had been “the honor of a lifetime to lead the Smithsonian’s National Portrait Gallery”.“This was not an easy decision, but I believe it is the right one,” she wrote. “From the very beginning, my guiding principle has been to put the museum first. Today, I believe that stepping aside is the best way to serve the institution I hold so deeply in my heart.“The role of a museum director has never been about one individual – it is a shared mission, driven by the passion, creativity, and dedication of an extraordinary team.”A statement from a White House spokesperson, David Ingle, reads: “On day one, President Trump made clear that there is no place for dangerous anti-American ideology in our government and institutions.“In align with this objective, he ordered the termination of Kim Sajet. The Trump Administration is committed to restoring American greatness and celebrating our nation’s proud history.” More

    More stories

    • 213 Shares50 Views

      in US Politics

      Companies that spinelessly follow Trump’s cuts to DEI will pay a heavy price | Miriam González Durántez

      by

      Organising a women’s networking event in the US has become an act of defiance. Companies with equality-driven agendas risk losing government contracts. Some are receiving McCarthy-like letters asking them to confirm that they have no diversity policies. Activities designed to support women, including healthcare research, are being threatened, and companies are backtracking on former commitments. Women’s networking events, the gathering of diversity data and targeted training are being questioned. And some companies are requesting that charities focused on women and girls consider changes to their programmes in order to navigate the current climate. The one I founded, Inspiring Girls, has already been asked to “include men as role models”.This anti-diversity wave isn’t just a social backlash to the many excesses of wokeness – it is politically orchestrated and driven. It crystallised in 2021, when the senator Josh Hawley devoted his entire keynote speech at the second National Conservatism Conference to “reclaiming masculinity”, calling for boys (not girls) to be taught competitiveness, strength, honesty and courage – as if those were only male values. Since then, the movement has reached the highest offices of power: the White House is its headquarters and its commander-in-chief is Trump’s deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, who promised last year to tackle “anti-white racism” if Trump won a second term.The anti-diversity brigade has no shortage of money or allies: several “tech bros” (whether out of conviction or FOMO) have joined in – as have tech venture capitalists and other Maga financiers. These are men who operate in fields dominated almost exclusively by other men and who wield enormous wealth and influence, yet they often cast themselves as victims. They hide their anti-diversity stance under the disguise of meritocracy.On the progressive side, there is a movement claiming that it is actually boys – particularly white working-class ones – rather than girls who are “in crisis”. It is led by the American Institute for Boys and Men, which last week received a $20m grant from Melinda French Gates. They argue that boys lag behind girls in education and employment. It is true, of course, that many of the manufacturing jobs that many young men used to rely on are vanishing due to automation and tech (ironically, for the benefit of mostly male tech moguls). Unfortunately, however, this well-meaning movement is fuelling the anti-diversity brigade’s narrative – because they can now claim that even progressives admit it is white men who are suffering.The Trump administration has not yet imposed specific obligations on businesses to withdraw diversity programmes beyond companies who have contracts with the government – including, now, some companies across the EU, but many are taking spontaneous actions. Some companies are doing so because their diversity policies were just for show, while others are simply acting out of fear. The trend is clear: many are eliminating references to diversity and equality from their websites and in their reporting; others are reneging from aspirational targets, stopping data-gathering on recruitment and promotions, and dismantling training programmes.Some of the companies that are backtracking have headquarters in the UK or Europe. And many of the US tech companies and funds that are leading the diversity backlash have subsidiaries and offices on this side of the Atlantic. Their actions are in straightforward conflict with the letter and the spirit of British and EU legislation on equality, such as EU corporate sustainability reporting rules or equal opportunities and equal pay directives.And yet the equality ministries in the British and other European governments – and in the European Commission – have remained largely silent. Most equality ministries and agencies are led by herbivorous politicians and officials who favour performative programmes over meaningful action. Confronting Trump is far too scary for them, which is why they have not set the limits of what companies can and cannot do, whether specifically or in general guidelines.Over time, it is possible the anti-diversity movement will yield some positives, as it could drive companies who continue to believe in diversity towards more meaningful, effective and data-based policies. Besides, in a litigation-led country such as the US, it is only a matter of time before the courts impose some limits on government-led anti-diversity intimidation. When they do, the backlash against companies that have acted spinelessly will have its own consequences.But the UK and the rest of Europe cannot be passive spectators waiting for the pendulum to swing again. Our equality authorities should counteract Trump’s raid on diversity by providing clear official guidance to companies on what they can and cannot do – it is their legal and moral duty to do so. America First should not mean America Everywhere when it comes to the fundamental principles of diversity, equality and inclusion.

      Miriam González Durántez is an international trade lawyer and the founder and chair of Inspiring Girls

      Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. More

    • 238 Shares93 Views

      in US Politics

      We demanded justice after George Floyd’s death. Donald Trump made things worse, but we fight on | Al Sharpton

      by

      Yesterday, I led a private memorial service at ​George Floyd’s graveside​, along with his family, in Houston, Texas. Once that was over, we visited the housing project where Floyd and his siblings grew up.Half a decade after Floyd was taken from them, they were keen, as are we, to ensure his life and legacy will not be forgotten – and to remind the world why the fight for police accountability continues.He died in front of the entire world. Everyone saw the phone footage of the incident where a white officer in Minneapolis kneeled on Floyd’s neck for more than nine minutes as he repeatedly said “I can’t breathe”, and cried out for his mother. His desperate pleas for help were ignored by those sworn to serve and protect the public; but they were heard in every corner of the globe.The movement for police reform gained renewed fire, and people from all walks of life demanded systemic change and the protection of Black lives. Five years later, while the officer convicted of Floyd’s murder is behind bars, the current climate in the US and regressive actions from those in power have set us back and prevented substantive police accountability.Just a few days shy of this sombre fifth anniversary, Donald Trump’s department of justice announced that it would back away from cases to force reforms on police departments – including in Louisville, Kentucky, and in Minneapolis, the city where Floyd was killed. This outrageous decision is not a surprise; it is just the latest roadblock in the fight for police reform and justice. It is an insult to the mothers, fathers, children and loved ones of all those killed at the hands of law enforcement. The consent decrees and small incremental changes that were achieved after tireless advocacy, organising, protests and political courage have been dismantled by a department that should be protecting the civil rights of individuals, not eliminating them.This move isn’t just a policy reversal. It’s a moral retreat that sends a chilling message that accountability is optional when it comes to Black and Brown victims. Trump is shamelessly weaponising the justice department against marginalised communities. The decision to dismiss these lawsuits with prejudice solidifies a dangerous political precedent that police departments are above scrutiny. The timing is no coincidence; it is an insult to Floyd’s family and the loved ones of victims such as Sandra Bland, Tyre Nichols, Breonna Taylor, Eric Garner and countless others whose names we may never even know.View image in fullscreenI remember delivering the eulogies for Floyd (one in Minneapolis and one in his native Houston) like it was yesterday. There was so much frustration, anger, disgust and exhaustion permeating throughout the US and, in turn, in many nations across the world. In fact, his death sparked global protests against racial injustice, particularly at the hands of law enforcement. Many young people mobilised and hit the streets for the first time, and more than 200,000 folks joined us in the nation’s capital for a march on Washington in August 2020 to call attention to ongoing police injustice. Despite a pandemic, hundreds of thousands from all races, ages and socioeconomic backgrounds protested alongside my organisation, National Action Network (NAN), as we led this march through the streets of Washington.Much has changed. In the wake of Floyd’s killing, and amid calls to respect Black lives, many corporations made commitments to continue diversifying and investing in our communities. Now we are watching many of those same companies turn their backs on their own diversity, equity and inclusion policies, capitulating to a rightwing government. The 2021 conviction of Derek Chauvin, the officer who killed Floyd, represented one of the first major cases in which someone in law enforcement was held accountable for their actions. But now some conservative groups and individuals are pushing for Chauvin to receive a pardon from the president. Such action would be the height of throwing salt into an already achingly deep wound. It should not be entertained for a moment.Some (particularly those in power at the moment) would like to distort reality and act as though police brutality and misconduct aren’t current problems. Nothing could be further from the truth. According to Mapping Police Violence, police in the US have killed 456 people so far this year (as of 23 May). In fact, there has only been a single day when police haven’t killed a person in 2025. And as it highlights, Black people are 2.8 times more likely to be killed by law enforcement than their white counterparts. This is why we still march, this is why we still put pressure on elected officials and corporations.For several months, NAN and I have been leading “buy-cotts” to support businesses such as Costco who remain firm in their DEI commitments. I have had meetings with PepsiCo’s chair and the CEO of PepsiCo North America, as well as Target’s CEO. Recently, I joined fellow leaders of national civil rights organisations for a meeting with top Google executives. And on 28 August, NAN will lead a march on Wall Street to defend DEI, remind corporations of their own promises in the wake of Floyd’s death, and reiterate that we will only spend our dollars where we are respected.When I stood in front of mourners five years ago at Floyd’s funeral, I said that his story has been the story of Black people, because the reason we could never be who we wanted and dreamed of being is because society kept its knee on our neck. Well, just as we loudly proclaimed around the world then, we say it again, remembering George Floyd, remembering all the victims: get your knee off our necks. Do it now.

      Rev Al Sharpton is an American Baptist minister, civil rights activist and radio talkshow host More

    • 150 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Pentagon orders military to pull books related to DEI and ‘gender ideology’

      by

      Military leaders and commanders at the Pentagon were ordered on Friday to go through their libraries and review all books that were related to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), in the US military’s latest anti-DEI move.Leaders were ordered to “promptly identify” materials that promote “divisive concepts and gender ideology [that] are incompatible with the department’s core mission”, according to a memo sent to leaders that was seen by the Associated Press. The department gave leaders until 21 May to remove the books.Also on Friday, the Pentagon sent a separate memo to the military’s training academies that the institutions should have “no consideration of race, ethnicity or sex” in their admission process and should focus “exclusively on merit”, though they can allow for students who show “unique athletic talent”, according to the AP. The department ordered the administrations to certify these standards by mid-June.The memo to leaders on books follows a similar order that was given to the military academies, including the US Naval Academy, that led to the removal of nearly 400 books from its library. Books that were withdrawn from the library included Maya Angelou’s I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, novels by writers of color including the Palestinian American Etaf Rum, and academic books that examine race and gender.The department said that a temporary “academic libraries committee” would convene to help the other colleges and academies remove similar books from their collections. Librarians and staff were ordered to use search terms like “affirmative action”, “anti-racism”, “critical race theory” and “white privilege” when determining which books could be subject for removal.The book bans also affect K-12 school libraries that are on military bases around the world. A list of banned children’s books, including books about LGBTQ+ teens and others dealing with race, has been issued by the Department of Defense Education Activity, or DoDEA, which oversees the schools attended by the children of military families abroad.On the list is a New York Times bestseller chronicling the true story of a teenager set on fire by a fellow teenager while riding an Oakland, California, bus, as HuffPost reported. The list also includes a collection of poems and short stories by a New York Times bestselling author documenting the feelings and experiences of teenagers in love.The defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, has vowed to purge DEI from the Pentagon, saying when he took office earlier this year that “our diversity is our strength” is “the single dumbest phrase in military history”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSince January, the Trump administration has been overseeing a widespread culling of anything the White House considers to be DEI within the federal government. The specific number of DEI roles that have been removed is unclear as the federal government isn’t keeping track or reporting which roles have been eliminated, but estimates say hundreds or possibly thousands of employees have been fired since the start of the year. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Pete Hegseth scraps Pentagon’s Women, Peace and Security program citing DEI

      by

      Pete Hegseth, the defense secretary, has abruptly banished the Pentagon’s Women, Peace and Security program as part of his crusade against diversity and equity – dismissing it as “woke divisive/social justice/Biden initiative” despite it being a signature Donald Trump achievement from his first term.In a post on X, Hegseth wrote: “This morning, I proudly ENDED the ‘Women, Peace & Security’ (WPS) program inside the [Department of Defense]. WPS is yet another woke divisive/social justice/Biden initiative that overburdens our commanders and troops — distracting from our core task: WAR-FIGHTING.”The defense secretary added the program was “pushed by feminists and left-wing activists”, claiming “Politicians fawn over it; troops HATE it.”But the decision is raising some eyebrows as the initiative was established during Trump’s first administration when he signed the Women, Peace and Security Act in 2017, making the United States the first country in the world to codify standalone legislation on the matter.The Trump campaign even courted women voters by citing the initiative as one of its top accomplishments for women on its website.Attempting to square this circle, Hegseth later claimed the Biden administration had “distorted & weaponized” the original program. “Biden ruined EVERYTHING, including ‘Women, Peace & Security,’” he insisted.The Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment clarifying what will change in this iteration of the WPS following the secretary’s announcement. Hegseth had indicated the Pentagon would comply with minimum requirements under federal statute but would lobby to defund the program during the next budget cycle in his initial post.The defense secretary’s problems with the program could also create awkward tension with multiple Trump cabinet members who were architects of the very policy he’s now dismantling. Kristi Noem, the Homeland Security secretary, wrote the 2017 legislation while serving in Congress and Marco Rubio, the secretary of state, co-sponsored the Senate version.Rubio, just this month, called it “a bill that I was very proud to have been a co-sponsor of when I was in the Senate”, at the state department’s international women of courage awards ceremony.Mike Waltz, the national security adviser, also supported other legislation to strengthen the WPS and served as co-chair of the bipartisan Women, Peace and Security Caucus.And first-daughter Ivanka Trump, back in 2019, also publicly promoted the program, writing on social media that “Today I was proud to announce, with female police cadets, that Colombia will develop a #WPS National Action Plan as part of our WPS partnership.”The WPS program, which originated from a 2000 United Nations security council resolution, was first created to boost women’s participation in peace and security planning and protect women from violence in conflict situations.Iterations of the program have since been widely adopted globally as research has shown that peace agreements with women’s participation are more durable. More