Senator Jim Banks has reintroduced a legislative proposal aimed at preventing accrediting bodies from requiring colleges and universities to adopt admissions preferences based on race or sex as a condition for accreditation. This move follows the Supreme Court ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA), which prohibits the use of race preferences in college admissions.
The bill seeks to shield educational institutions from pressures that might compel them to contravene this legal precedent. Additionally, it mandates that accreditors assess an institution’s dedication to academic freedom. These provisions are consistent with former President Trump’s executive order titled “Reforming Accreditation to Strengthen Higher Education.”
The original version of the bill, introduced by Senator Marco Rubio during the 118th Congress, barred accreditors from evaluating an institution based on its diversity, equity, and inclusion policies or the racial composition of its students, faculty, and staff. The newly revised bill goes further by explicitly prohibiting accrediting agencies from imposing requirements or conducting investigations related to the racial, color, sex, or national origin makeup of student bodies and faculty members.
In response to SFFA, many colleges have been adjusting their admissions strategies. Some institutions are exploring alternative methods to maintain campus diversity without directly considering race. Others feel compelled to align with diversity standards set by accrediting bodies due to potential threats of losing accreditation.
Earlier this year, Gail Heriot and Peter Kirsanow from the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights sent a letter to Senator Bill Cassidy. They expressed concerns about conflicts between current accreditation standards and the SFFA decision and urged congressional action against accreditor overreach.
