The United States Department of Justice and the Department of Education have initiated a series of investigations into the admissions and support programs of several academic institutions to ensure compliance with anti-discrimination statutes.

美國司法部與教育部已對數家學術機構的入學與支援計畫展開一系列調查，以確保其符合反歧視法規。

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has issued findings of discrimination against the medical schools of Yale University and the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), asserting that these institutions intentionally discriminated against white and Asian applicants. The DOJ's position is predicated on the observation that Black and Hispanic admitted students possessed less competitive grades and test scores. Conversely, the ACLU contends that the DOJ's analysis is statistically insignificant, noting that the variance in scores—one standard deviation or less—falls below the two-standard-deviation threshold typically required for legal significance. Furthermore, the ACLU argues that the DOJ's interpretation of Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA) is overly restrictive, suggesting that the ruling still permits the consideration of individual obstacles, including those rooted in systemic racial inequalities.

司法部 (DOJ) 已發布關於耶魯大學與加州大學洛杉磯分校 (UCLA) 醫學院的歧視調查結果，指稱這些機構刻意歧視白人與亞裔申請人。司法部的立場是基於觀察到，被錄取的黑人與拉丁裔學生的成績與考試分數較缺乏競爭力。相反地，美國公民自由聯盟 (ACLU) 主張司法部的分析在統計上並不顯著，並指出分數的差異——一個標準差或更少——低於法律上通常要求的兩個標準差門檻。此外，ACLU 認為司法部對「學生公平錄取對抗哈佛案 (SFFA)」的解釋過於嚴苛，認為該裁決仍允許考慮個人所面臨的障礙，包括根植於系統性種族不平等的因素。

Parallel administrative actions have been undertaken by the Department of Education (ED). Secretary Linda McMahon has characterized programs exclusively serving Black students, such as the Black Student Success Program in Chicago Public Schools, as exclusionary and in violation of civil rights law. This has resulted in the withholding of $20 million in federal funding from the Chicago district. The ED maintains that the disproportionate allocation of resources based on race constitutes an infringement of basic fairness. This shift in policy is mirrored by the closure of seven of twelve regional offices within the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) and a significant reduction in staff, which critics argue has diminished the federal government's capacity to resolve meritorious complaints of racial harassment and sexual violence.

教育部 (ED) 亦採取了平行的行政行動。部長 Linda McMahon 將專為黑人學生服務的計畫（例如芝加哥公立學校的黑人學生成功計畫）定性為排他性且違反民權法。這導致芝加哥學區被扣留了 2,000 萬美元的聯邦資金。教育部堅持認為，根據種族進行不對稱的資源分配構成對基本公平的侵害。此政策轉向也體現於民權辦公室 (OCR) 12 個區域辦公室中有 7 個被關閉，且人員大幅削減，批評者認為這削弱了聯邦政府解決種族騷擾與性暴力正當投訴的能力。

Stakeholder positioning remains polarized. While the administration frames these actions as a necessary correction of 'illegal DEI' practices to protect non-Black students, civil rights advocates characterize the strategy as an inversion of legal history. The administration's focus has expanded to include pending investigations into medical admissions at Stanford, Ohio State, and the University of California, San Diego, while institutions like Yale and UCLA maintain that their processes are based on academic achievement and personal commitment.

利害關係人的立場依然兩極分化。雖然政府將這些行動描述為對「非法 DEI」做法的必要修正，以保護非黑人學生，但民權倡議者將此策略形容為法律歷史的倒置。政府的關注範圍已擴大至對史丹佛大學、俄亥俄州立大學與加州大學聖地牙哥分校醫學院入學的待決調查，而耶魯與 UCLA 等機構則堅持其流程是基於學術成就與個人承諾。

The federal government continues to challenge race-conscious admissions and support programs, while academic institutions and civil rights organizations contest the legal and statistical validity of these interventions.

聯邦政府持續挑戰考慮種族的入學與支援計畫，而學術機構與民權組織則質疑這些干預措施在法律與統計上的有效性。