This post was updated Feb. 17 at 8:35 p.m.

“A Point of Order” is a column series created by Kayla Williams that highlights issues within our political climate and how they relate to the UCLA and greater LA communities. Williams hopes that “A Point of Order” sparks conversations about the advantages and disadvantages that many Americans may face because of federal and state policies and/or conflicts. All Bruins are welcome to submit op-eds or letters to the editor to add to the discussions within this series.

Attacks on diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives have strained the political climate and further divided a polarized America.

Although anti-DEI advocates portray the policies as a threat to equality, DEI measures promote inclusive spaces for people of all backgrounds. DEI has its origins in the 1960s and in many of the policy changes the Civil Rights Movement achieved, which continue to benefit every American today.

Following the murder of George Floyd in 2020, many companies and universities were compelled to implement DEI initiatives to create an inclusive atmosphere for their employees, consumers and students.

In 2024, right-wing politicians heavily embraced anti-DEI rhetoric, portraying DEI as giving advantage to certain races, ethnicities or sexualities over others and erasing merit. Throughout his campaign, President Trump said he would end “wokeness” – a term that has been equated to DEI – in schools, according to PBS News.

President Trump repealed DEI programs in the federal government through an executive order Jan. 20, according to the Associated Press. Since then, the Trump Administration has started taking actions within the Department of Education to remove all DEI initiatives within the bureau.

One of the main ways anti-DEI rhetoric has impacted education is by equating DEI with affirmative action policies.

In June 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed affirmative action, enforcing the use of colorblind admissions nationwide. Californians voted to ban affirmative action at public universities in the state by passing Proposition 209 in 1996.

Affirmative action refers to legal initiatives to serve underrepresented groups, while DEI is focused on cultivating an inclusive space for all. Many colleges and universities in recent years have established DEI or EDI offices to uphold inclusivity, including UCLA. A growing subset, including the University of Alabama and the University of North Carolina, have recently dissolved their DEI offices.

“We are interested in addressing underserved communities, underserved populations and that goes beyond race, that goes beyond ethnicity, that goes beyond gender,” said Mitchell Chang, the interim vice provost for equity, diversity and inclusion at UCLA.

In his executive orders, President Trump has lumped affirmative action and DEI together, insinuating that they are the same thing and both exclude merit. President Trump’s rhetoric and his executive orders have called into question how DEI policies are being implemented.

“When we talk about EDI task forces or departments, these are departments and task forces that are working to make sure that places like UCLA and other UC campuses are … being inclusive in all ways, shapes and forms, and not just meeting a quota,” said Kahlila Williams, a fourth-year African American studies and sociology student.

Opinions on DEI policies are mixed, however, and many question their effectiveness. Brian Fallas, a third-year law student at UCLA, said that he finds DEI policies to be counterproductive.

“My parents are from Costa Rica and Ecuador, so arguably, I would benefit from DEI programs, but I’m not a fan,” Fallas said. “I think that they tend to be counterproductive and more harmful than they are effective at implementing the goals that they want. I think the danger is that they tend to prioritize an immutable group identity over individual effort.”

In the months before and after Trump’s election win, many colleges and universities, specifically those in Republican-led states, have closed their DEI offices and cultural centers, including Auburn University, Texas A&M and the University of North Florida, among others.

At UCLA, Bruins have the ability to visit a plethora of resource centers for their needs, such as the LGBTQ Resource Center, the Black Bruin Resource Center, the Bruin Resource Center and more. These resource centers can be considered DEI initiatives because they help students from underrepresented populations create community.

Closing these centers would take away the hard work and years of demands that students have put towards establishing them to help current and future generations of students.

Diversity initiatives are fundamental, not threatening, in our extremely diverse nation.

Anti-DEI advocates prey on our society’s perceived lack of empathy to divide people and make them believe that cutting DEI programs will not affect them, often by rhetorically emphasizing that DEI is only about race.

However, with the erasure of DEI, people will realize how much they actually benefited from these initiatives.

Our attitudes toward diversity, equity and inclusion must change to protect our rights and spaces and safeguard them for future generations.