In the latest salvo from Washington, Duke University is now squarely in the federal government’s crosshairs. The Trump administration has launched a civil rights investigation into the prestigious Duke Law Journal, claiming that its editorial selection process favors minority candidates—a charge the university has yet to publicly address.
The Department of Education announced it will examine whether the journal’s editorial board appointments improperly consider race, color, or national origin. At the heart of the matter is a broader accusation: that Duke allegedly uses race-based criteria across hiring, admissions, and scholarship decisions. A joint letter from Education Secretary Linda McMahon and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has called on Duke to form a high-level internal panel to work toward a resolution—quickly.
This is not an isolated incident. The Trump administration has mounted a sweeping campaign against American universities, leveraging the threat of federal funding cuts to challenge programs it claims prioritize diversity over merit. From DEI initiatives to climate policy and campus protests, the pressure points have been broad—and politically charged.
Civil rights advocates warn that these investigations pose a direct threat to academic freedom and free expression. And the financial stakes are staggering.
According to reports, Harvard is considering a \$500 million payout to settle its own federal dispute—more than twice what Columbia agreed to last week. But Harvard is reportedly refusing a key government condition: the installation of an outside monitor to oversee its compliance.
Brown University, meanwhile, has scrambled to secure a \$500 million loan following abrupt cuts to federal research and aid funding. And earlier this year, the government froze \$510 million in grants to the institution, part of what insiders describe as an escalating federal strategy to squeeze universities through financial levers.
This crackdown rests on Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars racial discrimination in federally funded education programs. But critics argue the administration’s interpretation is less about enforcing equity and more about dismantling efforts that address historical marginalization.
Harvard is currently locked in a legal fight to regain access to frozen federal funds, with investigators previously questioning whether its law journal gave expedited consideration to a submission by a minority author.
Trump, who has made the battle against DEI a central theme of his education policy, continues to insist that white Americans and men are being unfairly disadvantaged—despite no credible evidence to support the claim. Civil rights organizations, meanwhile, remain firm: DEI isn’t reverse discrimination—it’s redress.
As elite institutions brace for more scrutiny, Duke may just be the latest—certainly not the last—in a line of universities forced to navigate the political fallout of a federal government determined to reshape higher education, one investigation at a time.
