The program uses tax dollars to pay for the salary and benefits of “underrepresented” minorities.
QUICK FACTS:
- The Texas A&M University (TAMU) faculty senate affirmative action program is facing legal questions for its initiative to hire non-white and non-Asian staffers.
- A memo from Annie McGowan, vice president, and associate provost for diversity, and N. K. Anand, vice president for faculty affairs states that the Accountability, Climate, Equity, and Scholarship (ACES) Plus program will receive $2 million over the 2023 and 2024 fiscal years.
- Much of that funding comes from federal funding and questions have arisen as to whether the school is in violation of discrimination laws due to the hiring practices.
- The memo states that much of the funding will be for the salary and benefits of “new mid-career and senior tenure-track hires from underrepresented minority groups.”
- Underrepresented minorities are defined as “African Americans, Hispanic/Latino Americans, Native Americans, Alaskan Natives, and Native Hawaiians.”
- Individuals with Asian backgrounds were conspicuously absent from the list.
LEGAL ACTION AGAINST THE PROGRAM:
- A class-action complaint was filed against TAMU early in September alleging their ACES program violated the law.
- The legal action states that the program is illegal because it “prohibits universities that accept federal funds from discriminating on account of race or sex.”
- The ACES program was voted on by faculty senators at TAMU who voted 54-12 in support of the project.
- Officials have defended the program saying that it is only intended to “contribute to moving the structural composition of our faculty towards parity with that of the State of Texas.”
BACKGROUND:
- A University of Texas professor filed a discrimination lawsuit against the rival Texas A&M, asserting that their policies discriminate against him because he is white.
- The suit asked a federal judge in Houston to declare the university’s “race and sex preferences” to be “patently illegal” under the Civil Rights Act. The complaint cites Title VI and Title IX of the 1964 law
