George Mason University (GMU) is facing a pivotal moment as the U.S. Department of Education announced on August 22, 2025, that the university violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by using race and other immutable characteristics in its hiring and promotion practices. The finding, which stems from an investigation by the department’s Office for Civil Rights, places GMU at the center of a national debate over diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in higher education—and their legal limits under federal law.
The controversy began when, in July 2025, several professors at GMU filed a formal complaint alleging that the university’s leadership, under President Gregory Washington, had adopted DEI policies that gave preferential treatment to prospective and current faculty from “underrepresented groups.” According to the professors, these policies, which were set in motion in 2020, prioritized diversity initiatives over qualifications, ostensibly to advance “anti-racism.” The complaint triggered a federal investigation into whether GMU’s employment practices were compliant with Title VI, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in any institution receiving federal funds.
Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Craig Trainor did not mince words in his assessment. “In 2020, University President Gregory Washington called for expunging the so-called ‘racist vestiges’ from GMU’s campus. Without a hint of self-awareness, President Washington then waged a university-wide campaign to implement unlawful DEI policies that intentionally discriminate on the basis of race. You can’t make this up,” Trainor stated, as reported by Fox News and The Hill. “Despite this unfortunate chapter in Mason’s history, the University now has the opportunity to come into compliance with federal civil rights laws by entering into a Resolution Agreement with the Office for Civil Rights.”
The Department of Education’s proposed resolution lays out six specific conditions that GMU must meet within 10 days of the August 22 announcement. At the heart of these requirements is a call for President Washington to issue a public statement to the entire campus community, affirming that all recruitment, hiring, promotion, and tenure decisions will comply with Title VI. Notably, this statement must include a personal apology for promoting what the department described as “unlawful discriminatory practices” and must be displayed prominently on the university’s website. Any previous statements that contradict this new commitment must be removed.
Further, GMU is required to review and revise all policies and documents related to hiring, promotion, recruitment, and tenure, ensuring that no provisions remain that require or encourage the use of race as a factor. Annual training on Title VI compliance must be provided to all staff involved in these processes, emphasizing that the university will not give preferences based on race. The university must also appoint an employee to coordinate the implementation of the agreement and maintain records that demonstrate compliance, making them available to the government upon request, as outlined in the WTOP and Fox News coverage.
The stakes could hardly be higher. If GMU does not agree to the resolution within the specified timeframe, the Trump administration has signaled that it may move to withdraw federal funding from the institution. This threat is far from empty; the administration has previously pulled billions of dollars in funding from other universities—including Harvard, Columbia, and the University of California, Los Angeles—over similar disputes regarding DEI policies and allegations of discrimination or mishandling of campus issues. According to The Hill, the administration has demanded significant payouts and access to admissions data as conditions for releasing funds.
The investigation into GMU is just one of four federal probes the university has faced in recent months, two of which specifically concern alleged racial discrimination in employment. The Department of Justice and the U.S. House of Representatives have also been involved in reviewing the university’s practices. Amid the growing scrutiny, some in the GMU community speculated that President Washington might lose his job. However, after a three-hour closed session, the university’s Board of Visitors unanimously approved a 1.5% state-approved salary bonus for him earlier this month, signaling their continued support.
In a statement provided to the media, the Board of Visitors emphasized its commitment to transparency and cooperation. “We will continue to respond fully and cooperatively to all inquiries from the Department of Education, the Department of Justice, and the U.S. House of Representatives and evaluate the evidence that comes to light. Our sole focus is our fiduciary duty to serve the best interests of the university and the people of the commonwealth of Virginia,” the board stated. The next board meeting is scheduled for September 25, 2025, when the resolution and its implications will likely be discussed further.
For its part, GMU acknowledged the seriousness of the Education Department’s findings. “The Board is reviewing the specific resolution steps proposed by the Department of Education. We will continue to respond fully and cooperatively to all inquiries and evaluate the evidence that comes to light,” the university said, according to WTOP.
GMU is not alone in facing federal scrutiny over DEI policies. The Trump administration has mounted a broad rollback of federal DEI programs, warning that institutions which continue to use race as a factor in hiring, admissions, or other practices could lose federal funding or face other consequences. This policy shift has rippled across the higher education landscape, with universities reevaluating their DEI initiatives to ensure compliance with federal law.
The investigation into GMU began on July 10, 2025, following the professors’ complaint. The Office for Civil Rights moved swiftly, and the findings released in August mark a significant escalation in federal oversight of university employment practices. The department’s insistence on rapid resolution—giving GMU just 10 days to agree to the proposed conditions—underscores the urgency federal officials attach to the issue.
As the deadline approaches, all eyes are on GMU’s leadership and board. The university faces a stark choice: accept the federal government’s conditions and overhaul its employment policies, or risk the loss of vital federal funding. The outcome will not only shape the future of GMU but could also set a precedent for how universities nationwide navigate the complex intersection of diversity efforts and anti-discrimination law.
With the next board meeting looming and the clock ticking on the federal deadline, the GMU community—and the broader world of higher education—awaits the university’s response. The stakes, both financial and reputational, could not be clearer.
