Last week, my home state of Michigan witnessed something truly terrifying: a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/police-respond-to-reports-of-active-shooter-as-michigan-synagogue-goes-up-in-smoke">terrorist attack</a> at a house of worship. The attacker drove a vehicle filled with explosives into a synagogue in West Bloomfield, a suburb of Detroit, just a few hours outside of my district.
Thankfully, on-site security personnel quickly intervened — stopping the terrorist and preventing any injury to the innocent children or staff inside. I am grateful to these guardians for responding quickly to safeguard those innocent lives, and I pray for the recovery of those injured in stopping this despicable attack.
This attack, however, isn’t an isolated incident. It is part of a broader and deeply troubling rise in antisemitism that has spread across our country since the October 7, 2023 massacre in Israel.
Nowhere is that rise more evident than on our college campuses.
Students have been whipped into an activist frenzy targeting Israel and the Jewish people.
Rather than stamping out the antisemitic fervor, faculty are fanning the flames. Many campus leaders seem completely unwilling to do anything about it.
<div id="attachment_1062451" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1062451" class="size-large wp-image-1062451" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2154554442-864x576.jpg" alt="TOPSHOT - Pro-Palestinian protesters, some wearing cap and gown, hold signs and chant at a rally in front of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on May 28, 2024. (Photo by Joseph Prezioso / AFP) (Photo by JOSEPH PREZIOSO/AFP via Getty Images)" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2154554442-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2154554442-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2154554442-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2154554442.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />JOSEPH PREZIOSO/AFP via Getty Images</div>
On campuses across the nation — regardless of size or location — student groups are organizing to harass and intimidate Jewish students. Groups like Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) are the ringleaders, often with the backing of similar faculty organizations.
At Columbia University, antisemitic demonstrators stormed a library, disrupted students, and chanted slogans like “from the river to the sea.” Eden Yadegar, my guest to President Trump’s Joint Address to Congress last year, described it as “disrupting one of the most basic functions of the university.”
All too often, this chaos leads to violence. The House Committee on Education and Workforce — of which I am the <a href="https://edworkforce.house.gov/">chairman</a> — heard from Michael Kaminsky, a student at DePaul University and a first-generation American who was assaulted by masked attackers for his efforts to promote dialogue about Israel and the Jewish faith. He was left with a fractured wrist, and his friend was knocked unconscious.
This is not what college should be. Students should be focused on learning and growing — not fearing harassment or assault because of their identities.
These actions are not happening in a vacuum. They are being encouraged — sometimes openly — by faculty.
At Haverford College, Tarik Aougab — a member of Haverford Faculty for Justice in Palestine (FSJP) — labeled pro-Israel students as “racist genocidaires” while praising the October 7 attacks as “a historic moment.”
At the University of California, Berkeley, a professor posted that he “could have been one of those who broke the siege.”
At MIT, former linguistics professor Michel DeGraff accused a student of having a Zionist “mind infection.”
<div id="attachment_1062465" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1062465" class="size-large wp-image-1062465" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2205276310-864x576.jpg" alt="Michel DeGraff a former professor of linguistics and now faculty at large of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) attends a protest at city hall in Cambridge, Massachusetts on December 9, 2024. The protest calls for the city to intervene and take action against MIT for its role in the Israeli and Palestinian conflict and for MIT to loose its non profit status. (Photo by Joseph Prezioso / AFP) (Photo by JOSEPH PREZIOSO/AFP via Getty Images)" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2205276310-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2205276310-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2205276310-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2205276310.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />JOSEPH PREZIOSO/AFP via Getty Images</div>
This kind of rhetoric has consequences.
Let’s be clear: for many Jewish Americans, Israel is central to their identity. When students are targeted under the guise of “anti-Zionism,” the line between activism and antisemitism is not just crossed — it’s erased.
And yet, too many university leaders have failed to meet this moment.
Time and again, university presidents have come before this Committee and refused to take responsibility. They hedge, they equivocate, and they fail to enforce even their own rules.
The result is what we see today: antisemitism that is spreading, intensifying, and, in some cases, turning violent.
My Committee has released a report documenting just how serious this problem has become.
The findings are clear: weak leadership, radical faculty, and emboldened student groups have created an environment where antisemitism festers — and Jewish students are paying the price.
This cannot continue.
* * *
Tim Walberg represents Michigan’s 5th Congressional District and is serving his ninth term in the U.S. House of Representatives. He currently chairs the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Protesters Gather Outside Pro-Palestinian Activist Mahmoud Khalil’s Court Conference In New York

The Profs Aren’t Alright: How Radical Faculty Fuel The Rise Of Campus Antisemitism

The Profs Aren't Alright: How Radical Faculty Fuel The Rise Of Campus Antisemitism

American Universities

antisemitism

College

Columbia University

Education

Hamas

Israel

Jews

October 7

Protestors

Radical Islam

U.S. House of Representatives

As the University of Notre Dame faces concerns of false advertising, it may be time for Catholic students and tuition-paying parents to ask themselves if they can get a discount on the <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://financialaid.nd.edu/costs-and-affordability/*:*:text=Table_title:*20Average*20Cost*20of*20Attendance*20for*202025*2D2026,Item:*20Personal*20Expenses*20*7C*20Cost:*20$1*2C200*20*7C__;I34lJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!xeeyTqD64ZFzG_RrEs6Yd0Qaau2zcy6SUEERwZ4F45ZWTmEYrJm7W1nCOGIuVsLO4nor7TKURdD2VfAPiiLS$">$90,000</a> per year price tag. While the school&#8217;s website <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.nd.edu/faith/__;!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!xeeyTqD64ZFzG_RrEs6Yd0Qaau2zcy6SUEERwZ4F45ZWTmEYrJm7W1nCOGIuVsLO4nor7TKURdD2VTuaGZjq$">reads,</a> “Notre Dame’s Catholic character informs all it does,” the recent promotion of a pro-abortion professor leaves that statement in doubt.
It’s hard to see how that Catholic character led the school to appoint an outspoken abortion activist to a leadership role. Either the Holy Father, church tradition, and the Bible are all mistaken, and the Catholic faith can in fact coexist with abortion, or Notre Dame is seriously misinformed as to what being Catholic actually means.
Susan Ostermann, the abortion proponent in question, was employed at the university for almost nine years as a professor before the school announced her appointment as the new director of the Keough School of Global Affairs’ Liu Institute of Asia and Asian Studies.
During her tenure, Ostermann used her platform to author and coauthor multiple articles on abortion.
“Forced pregnancy and childbirth is violence,” wrote Ostermann for <a href="https://www.salon.com/2022/05/04/forced-pregnancy-and-childbirth-are-violence-against-women-and-also-terrible-health-policy/">Salon.com</a>. “It is sexual abuse. It is trauma.”
“When the state supports forced pregnancy and childbirth, it is complicit in this violence,” she continues.
Attempts to outlaw abortion “have their roots in white supremacy and racism,” Ostermann explains in <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fwww.salon.com*2F2022*2F07*2F19*2Fabortion-and-guns-how-supremacy-unites-the-right*2F&amp;data=05*7C02*7Ckhamrick*40studentsforlife.org*7C0cf1d02750f443d94e9c08de629fea78*7Cb3f92ab929b141449c57d11e0e7a368a*7C0*7C0*7C639056636131764390*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ*3D*3D*7C0*7C*7C*7C&amp;sdata=TXL*2BrMPjzahb5dpgLcERcEvPkBHoMtHjKg4bomIhPNY*3D&amp;reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!xeeyTqD64ZFzG_RrEs6Yd0Qaau2zcy6SUEERwZ4F45ZWTmEYrJm7W1nCOGIuVsLO4nor7TKURdD2VSkEFO79$">another article</a> titled, “Abortion, racism, and guns: How white supremacy unites the right.”
Of course, almost all of the claims in Ostermann’s articles are false. It was the early pro-abortion movement, not the pro-life movement, that stemmed from racism and promoted eugenics. Nor, as Ostermann implies in her other article, are a large portion of pregnancies (or abortions) the result of rape.
But even setting aside the accuracy of Ostermann’s claims, her articles highlight a much deeper issue: a lack of belief in the sanctity of life. It’s impossible to believe that life is sacred while also believing that protecting preborn lives is “violence.”
Most would have expected better of Notre Dame. Recently, the top-ranked school did get a “B” in <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.instituteforprolifeadvancement.org/christian-schools-tied-to-big-abortion-2025-research-results/__;!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!xeeyTqD64ZFzG_RrEs6Yd0Qaau2zcy6SUEERwZ4F45ZWTmEYrJm7W1nCOGIuVsLO4nor7TKURdD2VbVu2X9l$">Students for Life’s Christian Schools</a> report that looked at 725 Christian colleges and universities claiming to be faith-based (excluding denominations that support abortion).
We found that fully 114 self-proclaimed Christian colleges have ties to abortion. That’s 114 schools directly violating the faith they proclaim. In Notre Dame’s case, their Gender Studies Program (and that’s a red flag) held an event “<a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://genderstudies.nd.edu/events-and-news/events/2023/03/20/trans-care-abortion-care-intersections-and-questions/__;!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!xeeyTqD64ZFzG_RrEs6Yd0Qaau2zcy6SUEERwZ4F45ZWTmEYrJm7W1nCOGIuVsLO4nor7TKURdD2Vcm379w-$">Trans Care &amp; Abortion Care”</a> featuring outspoken abortion advocates. That makes two major strikes against the school, apparently masquerading as a mentor of future Catholic leaders.
The most fundamental Christian principle is the sanctity of life. God created humans in his image, bestowing upon them inherent worth and value starting at the point of conception. Through that creation, humans derive, or are “endowed by their Creator with,” certain rights — including, for example, the right to life.
Abortion directly contradicts that principle, painting life as something meaningless to be destroyed at the convenience of another. In fact, <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://catholicvote.org/pope-tells-political-conference-attendees-greatest-destroyer-peace-abortion/__;!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!xeeyTqD64ZFzG_RrEs6Yd0Qaau2zcy6SUEERwZ4F45ZWTmEYrJm7W1nCOGIuVsLO4nor7TKURdD2VWoA4mIk$">Pope Leo XIV paid tribute to Mother Teresa</a> recently by noting that “the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion.”
By appointing Ostermann, Notre Dame has established — in its leadership, no less — someone who stands against everything it proclaims to believe.
In one of Ostermann’s articles, she writes, “When we stand by… we are complicit as well.” She was referring to states “forcing unwanted pregnancies” by restricting abortion. Ironically, her words ring true for Christians. If we stand silent while “Christian” institutions betray the Savior they confess by supporting the murder of infants in the name of compassion and love, then we are complicit.
What must happen instead?
For students, parents, and donors, the path forward is clear: Pressure Christian schools to either cut ties to abortion or stop falsely claiming Christ.
For other Christians, speaking out can take different forms — volunteering at a pro-life pregnancy center, supporting a pregnant community member and enabling her to choose life, or even taking to a public platform to proclaim the truth that abortion is murder.
For a self-proclaimed Catholic university — one that describes its actions as motivated by its faith — to appoint such a person to a leadership role exposes, at best, a lack of wisdom and, at worst, complete and utter moral decay.
This is a good time to pray a Hail Mary, to pray for us sinners, and those leading the schools where we send the next generation of leaders, that they be taught to uphold the faith and not to ignore it.
* * *
Kristan Hawkins is president of Students for Life of America and Students for Life Action, with more than 1,600 groups on middle and high school, college and university, medical and law school campuses in all 50 states. Follow her <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Ftwitter.com*2Fkristanhawkins*3Flang*3Den&amp;data=05*7C02*7Ckhamrick*40studentsforlife.org*7C27bf81b427ed4d25627b08de543f97de*7Cb3f92ab929b141449c57d11e0e7a368a*7C0*7C0*7C639040829270781521*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ*3D*3D*7C0*7C*7C*7C&amp;sdata=C7ZzuOMy7XZf3hb*2BILic3mUgaqZuQh6MDnb0058Hz9Q*3D&amp;reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!xeeyTqD64ZFzG_RrEs6Yd0Qaau2zcy6SUEERwZ4F45ZWTmEYrJm7W1nCOGIuVsLO4nor7TKURdD2VYCUQYHT$">@KristanHawkins</a> or subscribe to her podcast, <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fkristanhawkins.com*2Fpodcast*2F&amp;data=05*7C02*7Ckhamrick*40studentsforlife.org*7C27bf81b427ed4d25627b08de543f97de*7Cb3f92ab929b141449c57d11e0e7a368a*7C0*7C0*7C639040829270800277*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ*3D*3D*7C0*7C*7C*7C&amp;sdata=b*2FEcs9UMK8btQOVIQRZOYfijz83AGjLJGPSCY9iS12M*3D&amp;reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!xeeyTqD64ZFzG_RrEs6Yd0Qaau2zcy6SUEERwZ4F45ZWTmEYrJm7W1nCOGIuVsLO4nor7TKURdD2VZIKwc82$">The Kristan Hawkins Show.</a>
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Notre Dame in Winter

Notre Dame Touts Faith But Elevates Abortion Advocate

Abortion

Catholic

catholic university

Leftists

Notre Dame University

Pro-Abortion

Pro-Life Movement

Professors

College ed

Why America’s Colleges Are Far More Fragile Than They Appear, Part II

Economics

finance

Ivy League

Student Loans

Students

College decay

Why America’s Colleges Are Far More Fragile Than They Appear, Part I

The Trump administration has officially pulled back the curtain on the staggering amount of foreign influence-buying occurring on American college campuses. This week, the Department of Education launched a new transparency portal — <a href="https://www.foreignfundinghighered.gov/">foreignfundinghighered.gov</a> — revealing that adversarial and &#8220;illiberal&#8221; regimes have funneled billions into the very institutions currently serving as ground zero for anti-American and anti-Israel radicalism.
The data is damning. China, including Hong Kong, has pumped nearly $6 billion into U.S. higher education, targeting elite institutions like Harvard, New York University, and Stanford. <a href="https://chinaselectcommittee.house.gov/media/press-releases/transfer-portal-news-china-s-money">According</a> to House Select Committee on China Chairman John Moolenaar, this isn&#8217;t philanthropy — it’s a calculated effort to &#8220;transfer critical research, influence, and academic talent&#8221; to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
While the Trump administration is now prioritizing enforcement, the report highlights a catastrophic lapse under the previous administration. Data has revealed that foreign donations surged during the Biden years, with the Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) noting that the &#8220;floodgates opened,&#8221; creating what experts call a &#8220;national security crisis.&#8221;
Furthermore, the scale of the deception is massive. While the portal lists billions in disclosed funds, previous reports suggest that hundreds of universities have illegally withheld information on an estimated $13 billion in additional contributions.
It is no coincidence that the universities receiving the most cash from hostile actors are the same ones currently exploding with antisemitic protests and &#8220;illiberal&#8221; faculty agendas.
<ul style="font-weight: 400;">
<li>Qatar, a nation that harbored Hamas leadership, remains the top contributor with over $6.5 billion in total funding.</li>
<li>Cornell University alone took $2.3 billion from the Qatari regime.</li>
<li>Northwestern and Texas A&amp;M have also raked in hundreds of millions from the Middle Eastern state.</li>
</ul>
President Donald Trump issued an <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/transparency-regarding-foreign-influence-at-american-universities/">executive order</a> in April 2025 that required institutions of higher education to “report significant sources of foreign funding,” while noting, “But, because section 117 has not been robustly enforced, the true amounts, sources, and purposes of foreign money flowing to American campuses are unknown. From 2010 to 2016, according to one study, universities failed to disclose more than half of reportable foreign gifts. Even when foreign funding is reported, its true sources are often hidden.”
Trump pointed out that during his first term, “the Department of Education opened investigations on 19 campuses from 2019-2021, which led universities to report $6.5 billion in previously undisclosed foreign funds. Yet the prior administration undid this work, moving the Department of Education’s specialized investigatory work on foreign funds to a unit ill-equipped to perform it, undermining investigations, and hindering public access to information on foreign gifts and contracts.”

Man hold stack of US dollars.

FOLLOW THE MONEY: Trump Administration Exposes Billions In Foreign Funds Going To Woke Universities

China

Qatar

Back in September, New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/zohran-mamdani-social-workers-nypd-mayors-race-interview/">stated</a> that his administration, should he succeed, intended to dedicate $1 billion to the overhaul of public safety, which would include the hiring of many more social workers.
Following his election win, Mayor-elect Mamdani then <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mamdanis-top-incoming-aide-chief-architect-radical-proposal-overhauling-nypd">announced</a> that the “chief architect” behind the proposal, 34-year-old California native Elle Bisgaard-Church, was joining his staff, leading many to speculate that the controversial proposal now has real momentum.
While it remains to be seen how Mamdani and his administration will actually handle policing in New York City, it appears a substantial increase in the hiring of social workers is on the way. For many Americans, the idea that this new approach to policing will reduce crime — especially violent crime — is absurd. But for the far-left, it is not just about implementing an alternative solution to policing, it is about growing the ranks of credentialed supporters of anti-racism, diversity, equity, and inclusion — or ADEI — in public institutions, especially schools.
This isn’t the first time in recent years that tax dollars will be used to increase the number of social workers. From 2021 to 2024, the Biden administration’s Department of Education <a href="https://defendinged.org/investigations/granted-social-work/">distributed</a> over $100 million in grants to universities to recruit and train more school social workers. Twenty-two of the universities that received funding currently weave ADEI into all levels of their degree coursework.
But the integration of ADEI into social work goes beyond a few outliers, it is a core principle of the accrediting organization and schools of social work. In fact, over 55% of the almost 900 accredited schools currently list ADEI as part of their program objectives and philosophy. It is through these accreditor competencies, biased application <a href="https://form.jotform.com/80024346548152">screenings</a>, required <a href="https://defendinged.org/investigations/granted-social-work/">courses</a>, and student <a href="https://socialwork.asu.edu/sites/g/files/litvpz286/files/2025-07/Fall%202025%2C%20First%20Semester%2C%20SWG%20541%20%281%20of%202%29%2C%20MSW%20Generalist%20Learning%20Contract%20and%20Evaluation%20Sonia%20-%20Form%20Preview.pdf">evaluations</a> that schools of social work have become a tool for advancing left-wing orthodoxy into society and K-12 education.
The Council on Social Work Education (CSWE), the accrediting agency, not only weaves ADEI throughout eight of the nine student <a href="https://www.cswe.org/getmedia/bb5d8afe-7680-42dc-a332-a6e6103f4998/2022-Educational-Policy-and-Accreditation-Standards-(EPAS).pdf">competencies</a>, but it also includes ADEI as a core element in the organization’s educational policies and standards for which universities are evaluated. Rutgers University’s School of Social Work goes a step further by adding a tenth competency aimed at developing a student’s “<a href="https://socialwork.rutgers.edu/sites/default/files/2025-04/2022_Enhanced%20MAP_Competencies%202024_April.pdf">Liberatory Consciousness”</a> — the ability to “understand and identify how white supremacy, racism, and other forms of stigma, prejudice, discrimination, and oppression” impact people and communities. Additionally, CSWE’s standards state that social work programs must “recognize the pervasive impact of White supremacy and privilege and prepare students to have the knowledge, awareness, and skills necessary to engage in anti-racist practices.”
However, long before entering their respective social work programs, many applicants are screened for their commitment to anti-racism and DEI through essays, personal statements, and question sets. For example, Metropolitan State University of Denver’s (CO) program <a href="https://www.msudenver.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/2026-MSW-Personal-Statement-Prompts.pdf">states</a> it seeks students who are committed to “ADEI work,” and requires an essay that prompts them to discuss any experiences and specific roles they have had engaging with ADEI. A University of Alaska Anchorage <a href="https://www.uaa.alaska.edu/academics/college-of-health/departments/school-of-social-work/msw/_documents/2026-27-MSW-admissions-booklet.pdf">document</a> titled “Program and Admissions Information” declares that the purpose of the writing sample is to evaluate an applicant&#8217;s understanding and commitment to “social justice, diversity, and anti-racism.”
Just as <a href="https://defendinged.org/investigations/corrupted/">Colleges of Education</a> prepare future K-12 teachers to advance social justice and DEI in the classroom, so do social work programs.
In fact, the School Social Work Association of America’s (SSWAA) “<a href="https://www.sswaa.org/racial-equity-and-social-justice">Racial Equity &amp; Social Justice Resources</a>” page states that “school social workers are well positioned to be transformational leaders in promoting equity, inclusivity and supportive school environments.” The site also links to the organization’s “<a href="https://www.sswaa.org/_files/ugd/486e55_0be666d8efd241aba23af719e33856fc.pdf">Solidarity Statement with Black Lives Matter</a>.”
<div id="attachment_1015125" style="width: 785px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1015125" class="size-large wp-image-1015125" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/Wisconsin-social-workers-775x576.jpg" alt="Credit: Wisconsin Department of Public Education" width="775" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/Wisconsin-social-workers-775x576.jpg 775w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/Wisconsin-social-workers-300x223.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/Wisconsin-social-workers-768x571.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/Wisconsin-social-workers-1536x1141.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/Wisconsin-social-workers.jpg 1911w" sizes=" (max-width: 775px) 100vw, 775px" />Credit: Wisconsin Department of Public Education</div>
For years, there has been a concerted effort to increase the number of social workers inside K-12 schools. According to Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction <a href="https://dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/sspw/pdf/17-24_SSW_Trend_Data.pdf">data</a>, from 2017 to 2024, licensed and employed school social workers in the Badger State increased from 620 to 840. Overall, the percentage of schools with at least one social worker increased from 27% to 39%, while the per student to social worker ratio dropped to 1,014 to 1. The target <a href="https://www.sswaa.org/national-census">goal</a> of SSWAA is 250 to 1, or roughly 200,000 school social workers.
There is no doubt that too many young Americans have real mental health issues that need to be addressed. But inserting social workers, trained to be champions of anti-racism and DEI, into every school as a remedy is nonsense.
It is well past time for state and federal legislatures to rein in university social work programs and their accreditor.
* * *
Rhyen Staley is Director of Research for Defending Education. He holds a master’s degree in elementary education and has over a decade of classroom experience in both public and private schools.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=christmas&amp;utm_content=christmassale25">Christmas Sale &#8211; Get 40% off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>

US-POLITICS-VOTE-NEW YORK-MAYOR

Mamdani And The Expanding Army Of DEI-Trained Social Workers

Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI)

Opinion

Police

social worker

Zohran Mamdani

Last week, the White House convened an education roundtable with U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon titled, “Biased Professors, Woke Administrators, and the End of Free Inquiry on U.S. Campuses.”
Secretary McMahon opened the event by <a href="https://www.ed.gov/about/news/press-release/us-secretary-of-education-linda-mcmahon-participates-white-house-roundtable-left-wing-ideological-capture-of-universities">stating</a>, “It was an honor to be at the White House today with this dedicated coalition of students, faculty, institutional leaders, and policy advocates to highlight the issue of woke ideology and the capture of our institutions of higher education. DEI policies have turned universities from free marketplaces of ideas to purveyors of manufactured ideological conformity, chilling free speech and undermining academic rigor.”
She <a href="https://www.ed.gov/about/news/press-release/us-secretary-of-education-linda-mcmahon-participates-white-house-roundtable-left-wing-ideological-capture-of-universities">explained</a>, “We are committed to working with higher education leaders to reverse course from these decades of decline.”
The Secretary highlighted actions taken by the Trump Administration, including dissolving DEI programs, enforcing merit-based practices, and guiding universities to comply with federal law, noting that over 400 institutions have made substantive changes. The U.S. Department of Education is working to incentivize universities to operate with fairness, academic rigor, and civil discourse.
Providing strong, positive leadership, Secretary McMahon <a href="https://www.ed.gov/media/document/secretary-mcmahon-white-house-remarks-12325-112619.pdf">shared</a>, “We want to provide every opportunity for colleges to recommit themselves to principles like non-discrimination, open discourse and neutrality, financial responsibility, resisting foreign influence, and putting students first.” She called for a recommitment to principles of reason, individual excellence, and non-discrimination to create a “golden age” of higher education.
This was the second in a series of higher education roundtables. The first roundtable was held at the White House on November 19, titled “Administrative Bloat and Low-Value Programs: How U.S. Universities are Failing American Families and How They Can Reform.” It addressed higher-education affordability and key components of President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, including new caps on graduate loan borrowing aimed at reducing costs and boosting accountability.
Undeniably, the Trump Administration is providing pivotal leadership to reform public higher education. As Eric Bledsoe, Special Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy with a focus on education, explained at last week’s roundtable, “universities serve a public interest and must be held accountable by the public.” Bledsoe also noted that higher education should be about “cultivating mature citizens who are prepared for the workforce.”
It’s common sense 101, and thankfully for the American people, this administration is working overtime to change the status quo and cultivate a return to normalcy in public higher education, which has been overtaken by wokeness.
In October, the “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education” was released by the Trump Administration and sent initially to nine institutions. It outlined eight “priorities of the U.S. government in its engagement with universities that benefit from the relationship.” It clearly <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Compact-for-Academic-Excellence-in-Higher-Education-10.1.pdf">notes</a> that “Institutions of higher education are free to develop models and values” other than those outlined “if the institution elects to forego federal benefits.”
The priorities are as follows: equality in admission, marketplace of ideas and civil discourse, non-discrimination in faculty and administrative hiring, institutional neutrality, student learning, student equality, financial responsibility, and foreign entanglements.
The Compact <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Compact-for-Academic-Excellence-in-Higher-Education-10.1.pdf">reads</a>: “The leadership of an academic institute is directly responsible for its strategy, success, and adherence to legal and governmental requirements.” More specifically, each year, the institute’s President, Provost, and Head of Admissions will be required to certify that the university abides by the principles outlined in the Compact.
Violators — whether willfully or negligently — will lose benefits for at least one year. Repeat offenders will lose benefits for at least two years. Additionally, funds advanced to the university by the federal government during the year of violation must be returned. Most <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Compact-for-Academic-Excellence-in-Higher-Education-10.1.pdf">notably</a>, “any private contributions to the university during the year(s) in which such violation occurred shall be returned to the grantor upon the request of the grantor.”
Universities collectively receive hundreds of billions of dollars each year, yet do not deliver soundly on their mission. This much-needed accountability is a major step in the right direction.
As Secretary McMahon <a href="https://www.ed.gov/media/document/secretary-mcmahon-white-house-remarks-12325-112619.pdf">communicated</a> at the most recent White House education roundtable, she is inviting those leading higher education institutions to join her in “creating a golden age of academe — committed to reason, not racial preferences. Merit, not marginalizing the so-called ‘oppressor.’ Individual excellence, not ideological indoctrination.”
University leaders would be wise to get out of the business of indoctrination and discrimination and instead focus on fulfilling their institution’s mission of open inquiry and excellence in academics. Even if they do not align with the Trump Administration, agree with the Compact, or value meritocracy, their institution’s bottom line will be better for it. And most importantly, so will their students and our nation.
* * *
Dr. Keri D. Ingraham is a Senior Fellow at Discovery Institute, Director of the American Center for Transforming Education, and a Senior Fellow at Independent Women’s Forum.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=christmas&amp;utm_content=christmassale25">Christmas Sale &#8211; Get 40% off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>

Universities II. Google Gemini design.

Ending The Woke Monopoly: White House Takes Aim At Higher Ed’s Ideological Capture

Linda McMahon

Public Schools

Trump Administration

White House

Woke Culture

Artificial intelligence has been taking the world by storm, beginning a whole new technological revolution that has already influenced tens of millions of Americans and encouraged hundreds of billions in <a href="https://hai.stanford.edu/ai-index/2025-ai-index-report/economy">corporate investments</a>.
A recent Elon University <a href="https://www.elon.edu/u/news/2025/03/12/survey-52-of-u-s-adults-now-use-ai-large-language-models-like-chatgpt/">poll</a> found that over 50% of Americans now use large language models like ChatGPT and Google Gemini, some of the most popular artificial intelligence resources in use.
As a student, I can validate these findings.
When ChatGPT was released almost three years ago, many of my classmates and I quickly adopted artificial intelligence as part of our daily routine, using it for tasks like summarizing texts and exploring topics that would normally require far more time and effort. My phone now includes a quick access button linked directly to Perplexity AI’s voice mode, allowing me to directly open the app and verbally ask questions or verify comments.
An <a href="https://cdn.openai.com/global-affairs/openai-edu-ai-ready-workforce.pdf">OpenAI report</a> confirms this trend, finding that three in four college-aged users desire to use AI in their education and career.
Personally, my work and education has greatly benefited from this technology, as I am able to selectively choose the AI most applicable to my research and generate clear, yet expansive information on any subject that interests me, all without cheating or stealing information.
But, as everyone who pays even the slightest bit of attention to the news knows, there are plenty of valid concerns associated with artificial intelligence and its uses.
<a href="https://datascience.hawaii.edu/profile/peter-sadowski/">Dr. Peter Sadowski,</a> an Associate Professor at the University of Hawaii at Mānoa, has been examining this issue. His work focuses on machine learning and artificial intelligence, specifically how to use these methods to address the most challenging problems in science and engineering.
As a teacher, Dr. Sadowski has noticed a massive shift in the way AI has transformed education as we know it.
“With these language models, it is just so easy for students to take an assignment and run in through ChatGPT and get results,” he told The Daily Wire. “It can write an essay, it can solve a programming assignment, it can solve math assignments. That is just a huge shift.”
In response to this new challenge, Sadowski made some changes to his teaching model.
“The first week ChatGPT went live, I immediately abandoned take-home tests, since ChatGPT could just do all the questions … Most schools have some evolving AI guidances and policies, but the best way to learn is to experiment to become familiar with the capabilities of these technologies.”
Many schools have introduced AI policies to inform both students and faculty on how to use the new technology responsibly. For instance, my own school, the Franciscan University of Steubenville, introduced <a href="https://franciscan.smartcatalogiq.com/en/2024-2025/undergraduate-catalog-2024-2025/academic-and-university-policies/academic-integrity/use-of-artificial-intelligence">guidance</a> on using artificial intelligence, including <a href="https://magazine.franciscan.edu/articles/navigating-ai/">discussions</a> on its use in the <a href="https://magazine.franciscan.edu/articles/artificial-intelligence-in-the-classroom/">classroom</a>.
“The teaching profession has to adapt to these new technologies,” Sadowski said. “We need fair ways to evaluate student learning — more in-class exams, more careful assignments that test student learning beyond what they can do with AI.”
While many students like me largely support a responsible integration of AI into academia, sentiments remain divided among the American public, with 42% believing that it will make life worse, according to an <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/nbc-news-polls/poll-americans-form-views-ai-divided-role-school-everyday-life-rcna212782">NBC News poll</a>.
Some have a far darker view of the technology, with a new <a href="https://www.yahoo.com/news/article/poll-most-americans-think-ai-will-destroy-humanity-someday-212132958.html">Yahoo/YouGov poll</a> finding that 53% of the 1,770 individuals polled believe that AI is likely to someday “destroy humanity.”
“It&#8217;s become so easy and free for students to do this that it&#8217;s just shaken up education,” Sadowski said. &#8220;In computer science, the process of building something yourself helps you learn to think clearly and break down problems. If you let AI do all your homework, you will miss out on important learning opportunities, and when the AI fails, students get stuck. I see that happening in the classroom.”
Despite the possibility of cheating and outsourcing labor through AI systems, I’m optimistic — and so is Sadowski.
“In my own field, it takes students a long time to learn these technical skills to make progress on the research side,&#8221; he said. “I’m excited about the ability of AI to help student scientists accelerate research. That’s the hope.”
* * *
Simon Olech is a reporter studying journalism at the National Journalism Center in Washington, D.C.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

High school students e-learning over computers in the classroom.

I’m A College Student. Here’s Why I’m Cautiously Optimistic About AI.

Artificial Intelligence

ChatGPT

Gen Z

interview

OpenAI

Teenagers

For most of its existence, Wikipedia has been hailed as a marvel of the digital age: a sprawling, collaborative encyclopedia written by anyone and corrected by everyone. An open marketplace of knowledge. A monument to the democratization of information.
But democracies — political or epistemic — rarely collapse in an instant. They erode from within. And what my team at the Media Research Center (MRC) has uncovered about how Wikipedia operates, and how carefully it conceals that machinery, should alarm anyone who believes a self-governing society depends on an open, honest information sphere.
<a href="https://mrcfreespeechamerica.org/blogs/free-speech/luis-cornelio/2025/11/17/how-wikipedia-infiltrated-colleges-train-next-generation">Our recent investigation</a> shows that Wikipedia and its educational partner, Wiki Education, have developed a vast, little-known system for shaping, and increasingly weaponizing, the content millions of Americans rely on every day. What we found is not simply concerning; it reveals the quiet architecture of an ideological project. It is also possible that, in attempting to hide its operations, Wikipedia has crossed legal lines that could carry serious consequences.
Wikipedia’s co-founder, Larry Sanger, has said openly that the platform no longer reflects its original mission of neutrality. It has become a curator of political narrative, amplifying the messaging of the left rather than serving as an impartial arbiter of knowledge.
<h2>The Blacklist(s)</h2>
Wikipedia is transparent about one thing: it blacklists right-leaning news outlets and conservative non-profits. But even this admission obscures more than it reveals. In reality, <a href="https://mrcfreespeechamerica.org/blogs/free-speech/luis-cornelio/2025/02/03/exclusive-wikipedia-effectively-blacklists-all-right">Wikipedia maintains three tiers of blacklists</a> — Blacklisted, Deprecated, and Generally Unreliable — each designed to exclude certain publishers from the encyclopedia’s information ecosystem.
The “Blacklisted” category is the most severe. Sources here are blocked entirely; links cannot even be submitted for review. This is Wikipedia’s “do not pass go” list. It includes outlets such as the Heritage Foundation, Breitbart News, and the Washington Examiner. Content from these organizations is not debated or fact-checked, it is simply turned away at the gate.
The second level, “Deprecated,” involves sources that are “generally prohibited.” Users attempting to cite to these sources receive warnings, before Wikipedia’s editors almost always reject the suggestions. LifeSiteNews, Newsmax, The Daily Caller, and Blaze Media fall here. The effect is the same as the first list, exclusion, just with a thin procedural layer.
The third category, “Generally Unreliable,” is essentially a blacklist with a tiny escape hatch. Wikipedia discourages use of these sources and directs contributors to “more reliable” outlets. The Daily Wire is stuck in this purgatory: technically citable, but heavily disfavored.
The disparities this system produces are staggering. The Daily Wire has been cited only 445 times across Wikipedia. The New York Times, by contrast, appears in more than 1.6 million citations — meaning Wikipedia cites the Times nearly 4,000 times for every single Daily Wire reference. Similar gaps exist with Newsweek, Politico, and The Washington Post, which are cited hundreds of times more frequently than their far more reliable conservative counterparts.
More broadly, <a href="https://mrcfreespeechamerica.org/blogs/free-speech/luis-cornelio/2025/02/03/exclusive-wikipedia-effectively-blacklists-all-right">MRC research shows</a> that Wikipedia cites to left-leaning outlets almost 20 times more often than to right-leaning outlets. <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/695762/trust-media-new-low.aspx">Trust in the media is at an all-time low</a>, specifically because of the bias injected into news stories. Wikipedia intentionally magnifies that bias, resulting in gross distortions of reality. We have documented Wikipedia’s smears against many political figures, including President Donald Trump, Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Charlie Kirk. 
When gatekeepers designate half the country’s media ecosystem — representing tens of millions of readers — as inherently “unreliable,” the result is not a pursuit of truth. It is a systematic silencing of outlets disfavored by the ideological left. The encyclopedia built on openness now thrives on exclusion.
<div id="attachment_1011409" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1011409" class="size-large wp-image-1011409" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/GettyImages-1079587192-864x576.jpg" alt="skynesher. Getty Images. Male teacher giving a lecture from desktop PC during a class at computer lab." width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/GettyImages-1079587192-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/GettyImages-1079587192-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/GettyImages-1079587192-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/GettyImages-1079587192-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/GettyImages-1079587192-2048x1365.jpg 2048w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/GettyImages-1079587192-1800x1200.jpg 1800w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/12/GettyImages-1079587192-1200x800.jpg 1200w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />skynesher. Getty Images.</div>
<h2>The Student Army</h2>
Yet the core of the MRC’s latest findings lies not in the blacklist itself, but in the machinery feeding content into Wikipedia: Wiki Education, a California nonprofit created as a spin-off of the Wikimedia Foundation, operating with its funding, personnel, and blessing.
Wiki Education recruits college professors to assign Wikipedia editing as coursework. Since 2010, more than 145,000 students have participated, generating over 120 million words of content. On the surface, this could be a civic success story — young people helping build a shared public resource.
But the reality, based on the courses Wiki Education recruits and supports, is far more ideological. Classes such as Queering Religion, Critical Race Feminisms, Queer of Color Critique, Gender and Identity in STEM, and similarly activist-oriented seminars are not fringe exceptions; they are typical of the curriculum Wiki Education promotes.
These disciplines are not merely academic; they are frameworks for political activism. And the content they generate — guided by ideology rather than neutrality — flows directly into Wikipedia. The encyclopedia becomes the final destination for arguments crafted within contemporary left-wing academic theory.
<h2>The Taxpayer Foots The Bill</h2>
Even more astonishing is that this ideological pipeline is largely underwritten by taxpayers. Because Wiki Education embeds itself in public universities, it leverages state-funded faculty, classrooms, and infrastructure to funnel student labor into Wikipedia. Students believe they are learning digital literacy; in practice, many are producing politicized content for a global platform.
The pattern extends to Wiki Education’s leadership. Every traceable political donation from its senior staff and board flows to Democratic candidates, progressive PACs, and left-aligned advocacy groups. While not illegal, it reveals the institutional alignment shaping the organization’s priorities.
<h2>A Potential Legal Problem</h2>
This coordinated system — Wikipedia funding Wiki Education, Wiki Education training student editors, students supplying content that reinforces Wikipedia’s ideological filters — creates not only an informational problem but potentially a legal one.
When Wikipedia spun off Wiki Education in 2013, the structural ties between the two organizations remained unusually close. Yet Wikipedia has insisted in court filings, sworn under penalty of perjury, that it is merely an “interactive computer service,” not a “publisher.” It did so to seek the liability protections of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
If Wikipedia effectively controls Wiki Education as an alter ego — training, directing, and financing its editorial labor — then it may have misrepresented its true operations under oath. Filing false statements in court is a crime under state and federal law. Attorneys general in jurisdictions where Wikipedia has invoked Section 230, like the state of Florida, may have ample reason to investigate those claims. And while the U.S. Department of Justice has its hands full unwinding the malfeasance committed during the Biden administration, Attorney General Pam Bondi might be interested in this, too.
<h2>Why It Matters</h2>
Wikipedia is not just a reference site. It is infrastructure. It consistently dominates Google search results — Google itself being a company that aggressively manipulates search results to push its own ideology. And modern AI systems, including chatbots, draw heavily from Wikipedia’s content pipelines. When Wikipedia’s entries tilt, so does the entire information ecosystem.
Its blacklist system also has downstream economic effects. Being labeled “unreliable” reduces an outlet’s visibility, decreases traffic, and predictably harms ad revenue. The encyclopedia’s judgments ripple outward into media markets and public perception.
Given these stakes, Congress should investigate. So should the Federal Trade Commission. And attorneys general, especially in cases where Wikipedia has defended its corporate structure under oath, should scrutinize whether the organization misrepresented how it operates.
Wikipedia has every right to express ideological preferences. But it does not have the right to cloak them behind false claims of neutrality to donors, to engage in deceptive or anticompetitive practices, or to misrepresent its structure in legal proceedings.
Transparency requires accountability. And it is long past time for the public to understand what Wikipedia has become.
* * *
Dan Schneider is Vice President for Free Speech at the Media Research Center.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Wikipedia

From Open Encyclopedia To Ideological Weapon: Wikipedia’s Hidden War On Truth

Censorship

Democrats

Investigation

Media Bias

Media Research Center

Silicon Valley

Many detransitioners who speak out receive death threats. I know, because my son, Simon, is a gender apostate, and people call for his death all the time.
Gender ideologues become terrified when people like Simon prove there is life after trans identification. It turns out delusions can pass; people and families can heal. I knew this, which is why I stood up and spoke out when my son was in the throes of trans identification. When his doctor, right in front of my son, asked me, &#8220;Do you want a living daughter or a dead son?”, I told him it was the most shocking display of malpractice I had ever seen.
In college, my son’s classmates called for his death, yet they were allowed to remain on campus. My son was the one they wouldn&#8217;t allow to speak. He just wanted to tell people he had stopped believing he was trans, but the dean bellowed that he would never be allowed to speak on campus. They tried to get him expelled, his classmates screamed at him in the street, and he received threatening emails.
The gender ideologues want families like ours silenced. I&#8217;ve had a mob of trans activists scream at me, in my face, saying that I was evil and did conversion therapy on my son. I was surprised to feel calm — I knew there was nothing I had ever done in my life that was more right than helping my son find the way out of this delusion.
I loved my son then — as I love my son now — enough to tell him the truth. He was born a boy, he is a man now, and he has been male every day in between. For a while, he was angry I didn&#8217;t see it his way, but now he is thankful I held to the truth.
Puberty is hard for most kids, but it seems especially traumatic for autistic kids. When Simon was young, he would cry when anything changed — even when a restaurant or a gas station closed. When his voice began changing, he bawled abjectly — his own body had betrayed him from the inside.
Likewise, trying to find acceptance among peers is a challenge for all teenagers; try it when you can&#8217;t read nonverbal social cues or interpret your own feelings. As a child, a preteen, or a teenager, my son never knew when somebody was going to bully him. In the case of boys, he was surprised every time he was punched or threatened; in the case of girls, he was surprised to be the target of vicious rumors or a group shunning. He didn&#8217;t know how to handle it, and I couldn&#8217;t teach him. I didn&#8217;t know how to teach social skills to a kid I didn&#8217;t even know was autistic.
All of this contributed to Simon’s trans identification. My son was 14 years old when he called his mother and me into the dining room and played us a song on the piano about how he thought he was a girl inside. It was clear he didn&#8217;t want to be himself at that point. He was experiencing real distress, but he had been taught an escape rather than a solution.
I wanted to get him help for his discomfort, his sadness, his worry. It&#8217;s hard to get mental health support for a kid. Once a kid says he&#8217;s trans, though, it becomes almost impossible. You enter an upside-down world, where they believe parents hate their children, and the child tells the doctor the diagnosis. If you&#8217;re a parent who wants a therapist to help your autistic teen learn about how to perceive social and internal cues, that can all be derailed when he says he&#8217;s trans. They may want to wash their hands of him and send him to the gender center (where all patients are trans as a matter of policy). They may demand you get on board the trans train — or else.
This could be a kid who can&#8217;t tell whether he&#8217;s hungry or he&#8217;s angry. He needs help to distinguish those feelings. But if he says he feels like a woman, a therapist can&#8217;t even ask him what he means by that. Activists have gotten laws passed that can take a therapist&#8217;s license away if he doesn&#8217;t agree kids are trans whenever they say so. And if you, as a parent, aren’t careful, they could even take your kid away from you.
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Identity Crisis: Defying the Transgender Lobby to Save His Son" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Nk6GxP1jR-E?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Trans-identifying boys have cheerleaders everywhere. It&#8217;s not just the therapists, or the girls who will take your boy shopping and buy him women&#8217;s clothes. There are the school groups like GSA, which used to stand for &#8220;Gay-Straight Alliance,&#8221; but now stands for &#8220;Gender and Sexuality Alliance.&#8221; These groups preach the religion of gender. Our kids are taught about gender identities in health class as if they&#8217;re as real as chromosomes or conception. Online, kids can meet people of all ages with sometimes prurient enthusiasm for their gender identification. What&#8217;s one father against all of that?
One father can be a start. I taught my son that lots of people believing an idea doesn&#8217;t make it true, it just makes it popular. Reality is what&#8217;s still there when you stop believing in it. Right now, trans ideology is popular. But sex is real, and it&#8217;s still going to be here when the trans fad passes or your kid overcomes his delusions. If you succeed in holding the line against medicalization, he may be healthy and whole when that happens.
Parents have so many roles. Sometimes you&#8217;re a guide, walking in front of your children and showing them the way. Sometimes you teach, sometimes comfort, sometimes inspire. Sometimes a father is just a lighthouse keeper, maintaining a beacon so they can find their way back.
My son found his way back from his delusion. I don&#8217;t know all the reasons why, but I know he couldn&#8217;t have done it if I had let my light go out.
* * *
Gareth Amaya Price is the father of <a href="https://www.iwfeatures.com/documentary/how-this-desister-broke-free-from-the-transgender-contagion/">Simon Amaya Price</a>, a desister. Gareth Amaya Price was featured in a <a href="https://www.iwfeatures.com/documentary/how-this-desister-broke-free-from-the-transgender-contagion/">new two-part documentary</a> produced by <a href="https://www.iwfeatures.com/">IW Features</a>, Independent Women’s grassroots storytelling and original journalism arm, as part of its “<a href="https://www.iwfeatures.com/our-stories/reclaiming-biological-reality-stories/">Identity Crisis: Real Stories About Escaping Gender Ideology”</a> series.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
<a href="https://store.dailywire.com/">Up to 50% off razors &amp; DW Shop, up to 50% off Candle Club, up to 25% off Mayflower—bundles, gifts, &amp; last-chance holiday shipping</a>

IW doc

My Son Thought He Was A Girl. He’s Now A Detransitioner.

Autism

Boston Children's Hospital

Documentaries

family

Fathers

Gender

gender ideology

Gender Transition

Transgender

The Regents of the Texas A&amp;M University System voted unanimously on Thursday to adopt a policy requiring college presidents to sign off on any course that could be interpreted as pushing “race and gender ideology or topics related to sexual orientation or gender identity.”
The new policy seeks to prevent another controversy like the one that erupted at Texas A&amp;M earlier this year when an English professor was filmed pushing pro-LGBT talking points during a children’s literature course. The policy approved by regents defines race ideology as “attempts to shame a particular race or ethnicity” or anything that “promotes activism on issues related to race or ethnicity rather than academic instruction,” The Texas Tribune <a href="https://www.texastribune.org/2025/11/13/texas-am-regents-race-gender-ideology-course-audit/">reported</a>. Gender ideology is defined under the policy as “a concept of self-assessed gender identity replacing, and disconnected from, the biological category of sex.”
The policy also prohibits professors from teaching any material that is not consistent with the approved syllabus. Enforcement of the policy is set to begin at all 12 colleges in the Texas A&amp;M University System in the spring 2026 semester.
“What we’re doing is pretty simple,” regent Sam Torn told The Texas Tribune. “It’s not as complex. We’re simply making sure that we do educate, and we’re simply making sure that we teach what the course syllabus specifies that we teach.”
Videos obtained and shared by Republican Texas state Rep. Brian Harrison and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-texas-am-student-booted-from-lecture-after-objecting-to-professor-pushing-radical-gender-theory?author=Zach+Jewell&amp;category=undefined&amp;elementPosition=6&amp;row=3&amp;rowHeadline=Latest+News&amp;rowType=Vertical+Carousel&amp;title=WATCH%3A+Texas+A%26M+Student+Booted+From+Lecture+After+Objecting+To+Professor+Pushing+Radical+Gender+Theory">first reported</a> by The Daily Wire in September showed children’s literature professor Dr. Melissa McCoul advocating for leftist views on race and gender and asking one student who pushed back on her arguments to leave a lecture. The children’s literature course included material that advocated for introducing leftist gender ideas to children. One of the slides in the class was titled “Let’s talk gender in children’s lit!” and argued that “Childhood is the time for figuring out how to be a boy, girl, man, woman, or another gender.”
In a phone call with the student who publicly opposed the leftism espoused in the literature course, then-Texas A&amp;M President Mark Welsh said, “There’s not a problem” with teaching LGBT literature as long as the university makes it clear it will be part of a class. When the student asked Welsh if any more changes would be made, such as firing McCoul, Welsh accused the student of attempting to “pick a fight,” adding that the university would not punish the professor.
Welsh <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/texas-am-president-to-resign-after-leftist-politics-infiltrated-university-childrens-lit-course">stepped down</a> as Texas A&amp;M president less than two weeks after the videos and details of the children’s literature class were made public. A rule implemented in September requires that all course content at each of the Texas A&amp;M System’s 12 schools be audited.
“It’s a serious system-wide review of every course, every syllabus,” Torn said on Thursday. “We are examining the body of knowledge behind each degree, low-producing programs, workforce relevance and financial stewardship.”
Rep. Harrison <a href="https://x.com/brianeharrison/status/1989310142291100113">celebrated</a> after the regents approved the new policy on race and gender ideology, saying that his use of social media to highlight the issue at Texas A&amp;M “has done more this year to combat woke indoctrination than the entire Texas House and Texas Senate… combined.”
Some professors are concerned that the policy will only add confusion.
Geography professor Andrew Klein told the board of regents, “The vagueness of the language is problematic. Faculty are now assuming that all instructions in the topic of concern will be prohibited. Will subjects like medicine, public health and law, where such content is required to prepare professionals for the Texas workforce, be disallowed?”
Philosophy professor Martin Peterson added that academics must “seek the truth,” arguing, “When we seek the truth, we sometimes have to explore ideas that touch on controversial issues.”
“It is not always clear what counts as advocating for an ideology in those contexts,” Peterson said.
European history professor Miranda Sachs argued that the new rule would prevent her from addressing certain historical topics, such as the Holocaust. Regent John Bellinger responded to Sachs’s comment, saying, “There’s got to be some common sense in this.”
“I think we’re taking it a little bit too far when [we say] that we’re not going to teach about what happened in world wars,” Bellinger said.

Texas A&M

Texas A&M Restricts ‘Race And Gender Ideology’ After Leftist Literature Course Exposed

Leftism

Politics

Texas

Texas A&amp;M

Despite President Trump’s Executive Order 14151 declaring DEI initiatives illegal, wasteful, and discriminatory, and mandating their termination across all government agencies, DEI appears to be a sort of zombie — dead by decree, but animated by cultural and institutional inertia. On the same day — February 4, 2025 — that the so-called “Dismantle DEI” bill was introduced to both the House (H.R. 925) and Senate (S.382), I optimistically fantasized about a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/dei-deserves-an-accurate-eulogy">eulogy for DEI</a>. Unfortunately, while some progress has been made, largely at the individual state levels, the leftist leviathan that is DEI remains well-entrenched across a wide swath of our institutions.
As we close out the year, there are no scheduled hearings, markups, or votes on the bill; and <a href="http://www.apple.com">a 2025 survey by Paradigm </a>(via DiversityResources.com) found that over 80% of major companies have either held their DEI budgets steady or increased them, with only 19% reducing them. These numbers are harder to track for universities and non-profits, partly because many schools and organizations have strategically rebranded DEI programs with titles such as “student success,” “inclusive excellence,” and “community equity,” but a report from <a href="https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/DEI-Funds-UNIVERSITY-Diversity-Equity-and-Inclusion-Funds-and-Fundraising_Final.pdf">Defending Education</a> earlier this year showed that DEI funds still exist for schools in at least 44 states, and hundreds of millions of dollars are still being poured into the cause. Non-profits are finding that many <a href="https://diversity.com/post/dei-in-philanthropy-equity-nonprofit-funding-trends">donors are doubling down</a> on DEI efforts, albeit tying funding to more measurable outcomes.
The velocity and volume of DEI spending over the past 15 years is staggering — not merely in millions or billions, but plausibly trillions of dollars. In 2011, Obama kick-started the campaign with <a href="https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2011/08/18/executive-order-13583-establishing-coordinated-government-wide-initiativ" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Executive Order 13583,</a> which directed the Office of Personnel Management, Office of Management and Budget, and EEOC to develop strategic plans and metrics for DEI across over 50 agencies. It had no specific budget or spending allotments, but it served as the blueprint for such programs across non-governmental institutions, as well as corporations, universities, and non-profits. President Joe Biden&#8217;s subsequent <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/ending-radical-and-wasteful-government-dei-programs-and-preferencing/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">EO 13985</a> required every federal agency to file an Equity Action Plan.
The Biden administration shifted DEI into overdrive, allocating some <a href="https://www.bizpacreview.com/2025/03/10/biden-admin-went-on-trillion-dollar-spending-spree-embedding-dei-across-govt-study-says-1527980/">$1.1 trillion to 460 programs across 24 agencies</a> based on the FY2025 Equity Action Plan filings. Importantly, all of these dollar amounts exclude indirect costs such as litigation, compliance audits, and opportunity costs from DEI-related mandates.
Universities <a href="https://www.emerging-strategy.com/dei-spending-in-u-s-higher-ed-a-carnegie-classification-analysis/">spend billions of dollars</a> per year on DEI programs, with the University of Michigan alone famously spending some $250 million for one of the more <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/22/magazine/university-of-michigan-dei.html">spectacular DEI failures</a>. <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/top-dei-staff-at-public-universities-pocket-massive-salaries-as-experts-question-motives-of-initiatives">Salaries for the top officers</a> in these departments, which typically range in size from 3 to 25 people, average between $180,000 and $250,000 annually.
In the private sector, JPMorgan Chase committed $30 billion to racial equity and DEI initiatives over just five years (2020-2025). Microsoft invested $150 million in one year alone (2020) to expand its existing racial equity grants and DEI programs. Google previously contributed to over 200 groups dedicated to DEI  and has invested billions of dollars since 2014 in personnel, training, and supplier diversity programs. It is estimated that nationally, annual corporate DEI spending has averaged approximately $10 billion to $20 billion per year (see <a href="https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/private-capital/our-insights/discussing-the-state-of-diversity-in-global-private-markets">here</a> and <a href="https://buildremote.co/companies/keeping-dei/">here</a>).
Secretary Hegseth is working to repair the DEI damage in our Department of War, but he has a Herculean task in front of him. A host of veterans and patriots have written and spoken about the tremendous damage that DEI policies have inflicted on our military — eviscerating combat readiness, eroding standards, crippling morale and recruitment, and threatening our national security. [See Air Force<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Irresistible-Revolution-Marxisms-Conquest-Unmaking-ebook/dp/B0952DZ46D/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3ISCOE04FCUYF&amp;dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.5ikuS0t11e1M8t_dVKVrK0TTRBBR-k0bvxb066YffGm6BPUZBcpEf9jSv9lIp0DqErCYDn-r2fzbdMYNma9Kf7N7olk95VSUBkM_oaV0VVY.g1mUHZ8H8y2vc0tRanN4ob_E0DV-GUXH8iuHQnuttM4&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;keywords=matt+lohmeier&amp;qid=1762282380&amp;sprefix=matt+lohmeirer,aps,333&amp;sr=8-1"> Under Secretary Lohmeier</a>, <a href="https://starrs.us/message-to-senators-dei-is-a-trojan-horse/">Major General Arbuckle (retired)</a>, <a href="https://starrs.us/mike-rose-dei-is-manifesting-itself-in-the-military-in-very-dangerous-ways/">South Carolina state Sen. Rose</a> (retired), <a href="https://starrs.us/report-of-the-national-independent-panel-on-military-service-and-readiness/">Lieutenant General Bishop</a> (retired), and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/cigarettes-dei-and-our-military">Greg Salsbury</a>.]
Prominent scholars such as <a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=christopher+rufo+america%27s+cultural+revolution&amp;crid=23UXO1WIKCS3R&amp;sprefix=christopher+rufo,aps,559&amp;ref=nb_sb_ss_p13n-expert-pd-ops-ranker_3_16" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Christopher Rufo</a>, <a href="https://victorhanson.com/ten-problems-with-dei-that-frighten-the-public/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Victor Davis Hanson</a>, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Woke-Racism-Religion-Betrayed-America-ebook/dp/B095JLK96B/ref=sr_1_2?adgrpid=1343603773906492&amp;dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.IhO6sgetZ4xjVYkCQv6_yN8VU__vAYMgkAqNPiX-0dg5DjQYq04Sjw2s-sKvWOJnMVupxX_Yerqm02TXT5B99DUIyB6pCi2aSAbobw3mofKWFaCzcP5WxvsIn-bzbW5hLWqIQK9PimIL3x5tcvJkDnH6Gj8YaNot26qk2IxCtX0f2lnyfnYcAGD-3IwUM6JLr2cjH0ijk_I-zVPciT0hJFosnOibZXf_9SCjg30tpbb_LQpGO9MhO0grSda6P182tAWtWRCGRXAkcV_NXXLRrlPhJOhSlFSAt4kPEbl-oHo.pjLOCn7X5k3CptyBF2TDIFGiFcVN5Oqg_cKEOeGgdlU&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;hvadid=83975558545606&amp;hvbmt=be&amp;hvdev=c&amp;hvlocphy=71501&amp;hvnetw=o&amp;hvqmt=e&amp;hvtargid=kwd-83975581857106:loc-190&amp;hydadcr=8480_13544230&amp;keywords=john+mcwhorter+books&amp;mcid=359b8020a2b43364bd749073b564a123&amp;msclkid=0565530031fc1a91b3bc3a078790b5f4&amp;qid=1762113141&amp;sr=8-2" target="_blank" rel="noopener">John McWhorter</a>, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=heather+macdonald+author&amp;crid=2GWXB3DP1BDRH&amp;sprefix=heather+mac,aps,328&amp;ref=nb_sb_ss_p13n-expert-pd-ops-ranker_1_11" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Heather MacDonald</a>, and many others have written extensively about similar destruction inflicted across our other governmental, academic, and private sector institutions and culture. <a href="https://starrs.us/the-dei-ruse-is-imploding/">Dr. Hanson</a> concludes: “In the end, DEI will implode because of its many contradictions: it is racist to the core; it is illegal and violates court decisions and the Constitution; it destroys meritocracy; and it is utterly incoherent in adjudicating who and who does not deserve racial preferences.” 
The implosion may take a while. The enormous spending led to an unprecedented propaganda campaign, helping to cement deep-seated misconceptions in a large portion of the population. <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/11/19/views-of-dei-have-become-slightly-more-negative-among-us-workers/">Pew Research Center</a> reports that while the American public’s support for DEI has decreased slightly over the last couple of years, the country remains roughly split on whether it is a positive or negative influence. About half still view DEI as being about fairness and opportunity.
In a recent viral video, comedian Adam Carolla discusses the best way for the current administration to combat the anti-ICE protesters as it pursues illegal immigrants across the country. He wryly recommends that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement be retitled as something like National Immigration and Customs Enforcement — thus adding the letter “N” to the current ICE acronym, making it “NICE.” He goes on to make several jokes about how difficult it would be for anyone, including the media and Democrats, to attack NICE people.
In all seriousness, Carolla has identified the brilliant but insidious invulnerability of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and why it is so difficult to drive a stake through its heart (to mix zombie and vampire metaphors). Who could possibly argue with the promotion of such congenial-sounding words? Of course, the words are not the issue. Rather, it is the programs and policies that are implemented under their banner.
<a href="https://www.city-journal.org/article/how-dei-corrupts-americas-universities">Christopher Rufo</a> observed that, in practice, the policies bearing these labels usually promote precisely the opposite of what the words would imply. Diversity almost always involves implicit and explicit racial discrimination, excluding or limiting some groups by their skin color or identity. This is how you get things like segregated dorms and graduation ceremonies (“affinity celebrations”). Equity involves disparate and often unfair treatment of various identity groups (typically based on race, color, gender, and sex) in an attempt to equalize not opportunities, but outcomes. This is what produces outcomes like the elimination of standardized test scores to ensure that underqualified candidates are still considered. Inclusion usually restricts ideas and people who oppose the prevailing doctrine of the oppressed and oppressors. This is how you end up with things like conservatives being blocked from employment consideration or targeted for special IRS consideration. Perhaps most importantly, as well argued by <a href="https://www.hoover.org/research/new-clerisy-how-thomas-sowell-predicted-rise-and-ruin-dei-bureaucracies">Thomas Sowell</a> and <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Woke-Racism-Religion-Betrayed-America/dp/0593423062">John McWhorter</a>, these programs ultimately harm more than help the very groups they claim to champion.
I <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/cigarettes-dei-and-our-military">previously identified</a> commonalities between the propaganda campaigns for cigarette smoking and DEI. Sadly, thanks to billions of dollars of marketing — akin to views of cigarette smoking in the past — many, if not most, Americans are blind to the real impact of DEI, and that it is part of the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-state-of-our-political-divide?author=Greg+Salsbury&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=0&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=The+State+Of+Our+Political+Divide" target="_blank" rel="noopener">new Marxism.</a>
The challenge lies in how to open their eyes. Which message resonates more: a rigorously documented essay by a scholar like Dr. Hanson, or a 30-second TikTok clip decrying that we “should not be haters,” and that “diversity is our strength” — with music, dance, and millions of likes behind it? Perhaps Adam Carolla could assist with a counter.
Killing off the other half of the DEI zombie will require a three-pronged initiative focusing on education, litigation, and legislation. 
Firstly, we must educate the public by exposing the specific and measurable harms caused by DEI — from the erosion of meritocracy to the suppression of dissent. The more the public hears about the specifics — such as biological men dominating women’s sports competitions — the more they understand and oppose DEI policies.
Secondly, many DEI policies and practices have been and remain illegal — often blatantly violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. More plaintiffs must come forward to challenge these violations in court. A few significant settlements or verdicts in such cases could have a massive impact nationally. Additionally, any non-profit organization engaging in ideological enforcement under the guise of DEI should face a review of its 501(c)(3) status and an investigation to determine whether it is violating nondiscrimination laws.
Thirdly, right now, formal opposition to DEI rests solely on President Trump’s recent executive order, which could disappear as quickly as the next presidential election. We must demand that our representatives advance the House and Senate “Dismantle DEI” bills — codifying reform beyond executive fiat.
* * *
Greg Salsbury, Ph.D., serves on the Board of Advisors for <a href="https://starrs.us">STARRS.US</a>., and is the former president of Western Colorado University. He earned his Ph.D. in Communication from the University of Southern California and an M.A. from the Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism at USC.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Menu