As the Trump administration continues to enact legislation attacking Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives and practices within educational institutions, Fordham University said that it remains committed to fostering an educational environment that promotes its Jesuit values of inclusivity and cura personalis.
“Our focus is on continuing to provide programs and opportunities that support all students in ways that are consistent with our values, requirements under federal law, and federal grant-funding regulations,” said university spokesperson Jennifer Petra in an email statement to The Ram.
Since the start of his second term, President Donald Trump has passed numerous executive orders demanding an end to DEI initiatives in federally funded programs, such as educational institutions and the military. Most recently, on March 26, Trump issued his Executive Order 14398, “Addressing DEI Discrimination by Federal Contractors,” which requires all federal contractors, including Fordham University, to implement clauses in federal contracts stating that they will refrain from engaging in any “racially discriminatory DEI activities.”
The Trump administration defines such practices as “disparate treatment based on race or ethnicity in the recruitment, employment (e.g., hiring, promotions), contracting (e.g., vendor agreements), program participation, or allocation or deployment of an entity’s resources.”
This executive order is the second passed by the Trump administration that specifically targets DEI in educational institutions. On his first day in office, Trump signed Executive Order 14173, “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity,” which similarly restricts federal contractors from facilitating DEI programs.
A month later, all federally-funded Pre-K–12 schools, colleges and universities received a “Dear Colleague” letter from the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights threatening the loss of funding to institutions that did not comply with the termination of race as a factor in programs of higher education, including admissions and hiring.
Since then, Trump has taken many other actions targeting higher education institutions that, as according to his administration, have engaged in DEI violations. Two institutions that have been in the spotlight regarding these attacks include Columbia University and also Harvard University, which have both faced funding cuts.
More recently, prior to the March 26 executive order, the General Services Administration (GSA) proposed a draft revision of its Financial Assistance General Representations and Certifications, which are legally binding attestations that the recipients of federal funding have to agree to. The revision would require recipients of federal grants, loans and other federal financial assistance to align with the Trump administration’s definitions and interpretations of what is and isn’t considered lawful regarding DEI.
As is the case with most higher education institutions, Fordham relies on federal funding to operate. According to the United States’ federal spending database, Fordham received $36.5 million in federal funding in 2024 and $81.9 million in federal funding in 2025 — the notable increase from 2024 to 2025 can be attributed to the $52 million grant from the Environmental Protection Agency that Fordham received, which was later terminated. So far, in the 2026 fiscal year, Fordham has received $10.2 million in federal funding.
The database indicates that the majority of Fordham’s federal funding comes from the Federal Pell Grant Program and additional funding comes from the Federal Work-Study Program, Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants and research grants.
The actions taken by Trump during his second term have threatened federal funding to higher education institutions, which includes the federal funding that Fordham receives. Petra said that during this time, Fordham has continued to follow legislation that directly impacts the university while also simultaneously upholding Fordham’s values.
“We are closely monitoring federal guidance and executive actions to ensure the University remains in compliance with applicable laws and regulations,” Petra said. “At the same time, we remain firmly committed to our mission as a Catholic Jesuit institution — one that emphasizes education, access, and care for the whole person.”
Historically, Catholics and Jesuits have affirmed DEI-related frameworks through the Catholic Church’s social teachings of “belonging, dignity and justice.” More specifically, Catholics and Jesuits have argued for practices of diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging in education, stating that these practices are rooted in Catholicism.
Executive Director of Campus Ministry Phillip Judge, S.J., explained that while DEI has traditionally not been included in Catholic social teaching, principles of inclusion and equity are upheld by Catholic doctrine.
“I think this is very much a battle about terminology,” Judge said. “Before we used the term DEI, we always talked about inclusiveness. We always talked about Jesus’ ministry as being one of inclusion, and in Catholic social teaching and also just in Catholic reading of Scripture.”
These same Catholic and Jesuit social teachings are those that define Fordham’s operations, according to the university’s mission statement, which states that Fordham is “Guided by its Catholic and Jesuit traditions.”
Fordham’s Current DEI Practices
As it currently stands, Fordham has several programs and initiatives related to DEI. In 2020, Fordham initiated a “Diversity and Inclusion” action plan that aims to recruit a more diverse student body through strategic admissions strategies. Additionally, the plan strives to diversify Fordham’s faculty and foster partnerships with outside Bronx-based organizations.
Fordham’s Office of Equity, Inclusion and Opportunity says it is part of Fordham’s overall dedication to “create and sustain a diverse, inclusive, and just campus community in which all members thrive through strategic and purposeful collaborations across the university and in our neighboring communities in the Bronx and Manhattan.” Their website states that their mission and vision are ingrained in Fordham’s Jesuit identity.
The Ram reached out to Vice President for Equity and Inclusion James A. Felton III, who declined to comment on the recent developments at the federal level and their impact on Fordham’s DEI practices.
The Fordham Office of Multicultural Affairs (OMA) also works to implement programs that facilitate diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging. Their website states that their mission “show[s] commitment to the Jesuit ideas of caring for the whole person and striving for the greater good to cultivate an intentional and conscious Fordham community.”
The Ram reached out to officials from OMA to ask about the impact of federal developments on their current programs; however, they also declined to comment.
The university’s webpage “Updates on Evolving Political Landscape” contains a section titled “Diversity and Inclusion,” which underlies diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging as an integral part of a Jesuit education.
“We embrace diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging principles as central to our Jesuit mission —and as part of our commitment to promote understanding, solidarity, and a sense of study toward others and our broader community,” reads the website.
In addition to efforts within its administrative offices, Fordham has several student-run initiatives aimed at fostering inclusion among the Fordham community. One such initiative is the United Student Government’s Diversity Action Coalition (DAC), which organizes student programming and collaborates with various members of the university administration to highlight underrepresented spaces at Fordham. Their goal, according to USG Vice President of Diversity and Inclusion Laila Sayegh, FCRH ’27, is to give a voice to underrepresented groups on campus and facilitate programming that allows them to feel more included.
Regarding recent federal actions, Sayegh explained that Fordham has not made any concrete changes to their DEI policies at an administrative level that she is aware of, but that her committee did have to brainstorm different approaches to their training programs when restrictions from the federal government emerged.
“We were a little bit nervous when the federal restraints idea first rolled out,” Sayegh said. “We don’t want to be like imposing DEI. We don’t know how that’s going to get interpreted.”
Sayegh also said that her committee ultimately decided to work with OMA to expand their student programming, because she believes that the student-led programming, which she described as a “bottom-up” approach, would make Fordham less vulnerable to federal restrictions.
“We reoriented to a DEI education lens, and that really has to do with programming, because student programming is less vulnerable to being shut down, just as long as it’s for educational purposes rather than like a formal DEI training,” Sayegh said. “I feel like if we were to do educational events under the guise of not being oriented towards diversity, it would be seen more as okay.”
How is Fordham University responding?
In terms of how Fordham as an institution is responding to these executive orders and changes at the federal level, Petra outlined that, given that the federal guidelines and mandates are continuously changing, the university has refrained from making any formal discernments as to how these proposals might impact Fordham.
“The definitions and parameters outlined at the federal level continue to evolve, so it would be premature to make broad determinations about what may be considered discriminatory practices, as well as the potential impact of the General Services Administration proposal,” Petra said. She also explained that the university has undergone a broader shift in its DEI practices.
“As part of Fordham’s natural institutional evolution, we have transitioned away from a stand-alone diversity and anti-racism framework and embedded those priorities directly into the University’s strategic plan,” Petra said. “This approach ensures that equity, inclusion, and belonging are not isolated initiatives, but instead are integrated into the core of how the University operates moving forward.”
Petra said that going forward, the university aims to continue upholding Fordham’s values.
“Ultimately, our goal is to remain grounded in our mission while adapting responsibly to a changing environment,” Petra said. “We are committed to supporting our students, faculty, and staff in ways that are thoughtful, inclusive, and sustainable over time.”
At a general press conference with The Ram and The Observer, Fordham President Tania Tetlow detailed her stance and opinion on Trump’s March 26 executive order.
“Some of the administration’s orders seem to go beyond what is actual statutory law in ways that create potential constitutional problems,” she said. “A lot of those orders are currently the subject of constitutional challenges and litigation, so to suddenly tie federal funding to compliance with things that may or may not be legal creates both confusion and real hardship.
When she was asked whether Fordham would add clauses to its contracts to comply with the executive order, Tetlow said she expects the legislation to be taken to the courts.
“My hope is that this will be resolved in the courts before it comes to that,” Tetlow said.
Why is DEI Important?
Some Fordham students outlined the importance of DEI initiatives in universities and higher education institutions. Deborah Adenjano, FCRH ’26, the DAC current DEI subcommittee head, detailed her stance on what defines DEI.
“DEI, I think, is to help create more cultural competency, and also help people understand what potential biases that they may have or that there might be, and also be aware of how to handle situations in groups that have a multiplicity of areas of different people of different backgrounds,” Adenjano said.
Adenjano also explained her observations of the impact that the recent federal developments have had on Fordham’s student body.
“I think it definitely makes students feel scared. It could definitely make students feel hopeless,” Adenjano said. “But I feel like that’s what the federal government wants. It wants you to decide to cut things off before they even do anything, and they might not even do anything, and so I think it’s up to us to stay strong and not feed into the fear tactics.”
She also argued that there are some things that the federal government cannot restrict, despite their efforts.
“Even if Trump said, ‘let’s get rid of Black History Month,’ we’re still going to celebrate Black History Month, so I still kind of feel like, sure, the federal government could try to be more restrictive, but that won’t stop anything,” she said.
Professor of religion and President of the Fordham chapter of the American Association of University Professors Thomas Beaudoin said the Trump administration’s actions against DEI represent an attempt to control the intellectual life of educational institutions.
“It’s dangerous to higher education to have government interference like this in the intellectual mission of the university,” Beaudoin said. “The search for truth, which is certainly core to a Jesuit mission like that of Fordham University, a search for truth needs to be carried out. Unimpeded.”
He further explained how the government’s actions against DEI hinder universities from furthering this search for truth.
“The way that quest for truth relates to DEI is if we have a system that subtly or overtly keeps certain voices, has kept certain voices muted in the conversation, or unfairly advantaged other voices, then we need to have ways of adjusting for that and be intentional about it,” Beaudoin said. “The point is that the university be a place of welcome for everyone, and that all voices count as equal and all voices count as meaningful in the conversation.”
When discussing the Jesuit education specifically, Judge explained that the principles of equity and inclusion are integral.
“Even if you look at the whole history of Jesuit education, it began as an attempt to bring people education who wouldn’t otherwise have had it. Right from the beginning, our point was to include people who were excluded from this,” Judge said. “So, our job has always been to be inclusive,” Judge concluded.
