Cornell University faces accusations of race-based discrimination after evolutionary biologist Colin Wright filed a federal complaint alleging the university hired based on race rather than merit. Wright claims internal emails show Cornell pursued a preset “diversity hire,” preventing him and other qualified researchers from competing.
Wright applied for a tenure-track position in Cornell’s Neurobiology and Behavior department in 2020. Unbeknownst to him, Cornell initiated a separate search in evolutionary biology, his exact field—but kept it confidential. Internal messages show the committee planned to invite a single Black candidate it had preselected, with no open competition. Wright asserts he and other well-qualified applicants were excluded outright.
The internal documents were released by the America First Policy Institute in a civil rights complaint filed June 30, 2025. The suit charges Cornell with running “a covert discriminatory hiring scheme” that prioritized identity characteristics over qualifications. It also cites a 2022 email rejecting a candidate for lacking a strong enough DEI statement.
Wright emphasizes that Cornell’s actions violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. In a Wall Street Journal opinion, he described the complaint as a “last resort” after a decade of scholarly work was derailed by what he sees as illegal bias based on his race.
The Department of Justice has signaled it will investigate such claims aggressively, consistent with federal efforts to end identity-based hiring and admissions practices. Cornell acknowledges the emails are authentic but attributes the issues to misunderstandings across multiple departments. The university asserts its commitment to merit-based hiring and reports engaging outside firms to audit policies and correct any missteps.
The complaint also highlights Cornell’s NIH-funded Faculty Institutional Recruitment for Sustainable Transformation (FIRST) program. Its structure included multiple stage checkpoints aimed at ensuring diverse candidate pools. Critics argue the system paused or altered searches until the pool reached demographic goals—raising questions about whether the process complied with federal civil rights law.
Cornell formally disputes the allegations. A spokesperson reaffirmed the university’s non-discrimination policies and expressed commitment to legal compliance. Driven by conservative Christian values, critics say Cornell’s behavior undermines meritocracy and violates fair opportunity principles.
This case places Cornell under high-stakes scrutiny. If investigations confirm wrongdoing, repercussions may include federal penalties and loss of funding. At issue is whether prestigious institutions remain bound to constitutional standards over identity-based ideology.
