Director, Commonwealth Policy Center

Kentucky’s largest universities were under a legislative microscope on September 17 at a hearing of the Interim Joint Committee on Education in Frankfort. The hearing came on the heels of actions taken by the University of Kentucky and Northern Kentucky University to close their offices for diversity, equity, and inclusion. They’re not alone, as several other institutions have renamed or reorganized their DEI initiatives with less objectionable framing. The legislators interviewed several university presidents about the decision.

The clear subtext is that universities have taken these actions because the handwriting is on the wall for DEI in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Just one day before the hearing, Rep. Josh Calloway (R-Irvington) announced that he will sponsor a bill in 2025 which would eliminate diversity requirements at Kentucky’s public universities. While a bill that would have eliminated these DEI programs entirely did not pass in 2024, a similar proposal will likely reappear as well.

Thus it’s no surprise that Kentucky’s university presidents struck a conciliatory tone with Republican legislators who raised questions about DEI, which they believe is institutionalized discrimination, at their institutions. They likely learned their lesson from a similar congressional hearing that investigated antisemitism on college campuses in April. In the aftermath, multiple Ivy League presidents who allowed anti-semitism to run amuck were eventually fired for their refusal to condemn campus protests as antisemitic.

UK President Eli Capilouto said that all concerned had a common goal: determining “how we support everyone, regardless of where they are from, what they think, who they are.” He also said that the free exchange of ideas is a priority and that discomfort at hearing controversial ideas is no excuse for censorship.

Sen. Lindsay Tichenor (R-Smithfield) noted her concern at antisemitic protests on campus which make Jewish students feel unsafe. DEI has pitted groups against one another in recent months. For example, on the campus of UCLA in California, Pro-Palestinian activists created a Jew-free zone. It took the ruling of a federal judge to force the university to protect Jewish students.

Anti-semitism doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It happens when DEI causes some to view supposedly privileged students, like Jews, as an oppressor class that needs to be dismantled. As a consequence, university presidents at Harvard and Columbia were forced out. These institutions are also rated last in free speech.

Conservatives are applauding the decision of some universities to end their DEI programs, even if it is under legislative pressure. But questions remain about the authenticity of these actions. The University of Louisville simply renamed their Office of DEI to the Office of Institutional Equity. It remains to be seen whether this is true reform or masked rebranding. What’s certain is that it’s up to Kentucky citizens and their elected representatives—not progressive mainstream media, which no longer reports on this issue—to keep them accountable.

So what should Kentucky’s public universities be striving for? They should focus on the highest standards of academic excellence. They should uphold students’ free exchange of ideas and the pursuit of truth without threat of reprisal. Their faculties should be representative of the values and diversity of the Commonwealth. They should stand against threats of violence against college students for their ethnic identity or political ideas. The purpose of academic life is to pursue truth in an open and safe environment.

Most of the universities practicing DEI justify it as a tool to make sure all students feel welcome. But categorizing students and emphasizing race and gender is anything but welcoming. This tends to divide. It assumes that the most fundamental thing about us is what we look like. But academic life must assume the exact opposite: all human beings are made in God’s image with equal value and equal worth. And everyone regardless of their gender or skin color can pursue their God-given calling without being stigmatized or harassed.