Recent threats of executive orders have been leveled by President Donald Trump about pulling federal funding from colleges and universities throughout the United States that refuse to withdraw policies protecting diversity, equity, inclusion and access, which sparked serious controversy throughout the education system. Some schools are pushing back. They want to know what this could mean for students of all age groups who benefit from these resources or find themselves disadvantaged without them. What could this mean for the 15 programs provided here at American River College?
For the next year, federal funds have already been acquired for the college and its programs, but the following years’ funding is not guaranteed. Of 15 programs, it can be concluded that only one specifically relies on federal funding, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival program, also known as the DACA program for undocumented and foreign-born students and El Centro. The other 14 are primarily state funded and cannot be affected by the Trump administrations’ threats against funding. On the same side of that coin, should federal funding be pulled because of refusal to eliminate these programs, state funding may be reallocated from these programs to make up for lost federal funding.
California Community College Chancellor Sonya Christan and Public Information Officer Jill Wagner, who is also the district spokesperson for the State Center Community College District, are among other community college representatives pushing back against the removal of DEI in education. There are even lawsuits coming in from different professors who have felt pushback when enforcing DEI policies, as well as some from professors refusing to implement it, like Daymon Johnson, a history professor at Bakersfield City College.
Sandra Guzman, dean of student engagement and completion, oversees these programs and provides a lot of insight on what we can expect in the coming days, though results may vary as federal funding remains unpredictable. Right now, Guzman says there isn’t really a way to measure the impact of these threats, should they be turned into action.
Guzman stressed that these programs may play a critical role in aiding in the need for diversity, equity and inclusion, but regardless of policy, it is not the sole responsibility of these programs to promote diversity, equity, inclusion and access to minorities or undocumented populations on campus, but the entire campus collective.
“This is something that can continue to be applied across all disciplines, not just in reference to student services, but across the culture of the college administration as a whole and throughout the school district as well,” Guzman said.
To simplify, Guzman argues that regardless of what happens, this community must rely on each collective faculty, student, and any other member in these social circles here on campus to continue to support diversity and inclusion amongst their peers and constituents in everyday interactions regardless of whether it is enforced involuntarily through policy. For this inadvertently is in and of itself a form of social equity. She asserts that the people must maintain a culture on campus that is inviting and equitable to all walks of life, regardless of race, ethnicity, disability, gender, veteran status, or religion simply because it is the right thing to do to give everyone a chance, to assert a true means of equality. There is no equality or evidence of it without a reflection of diversity, equity, inclusion and access.
“The removal of these protections doesn’t seem to be about merit, or equality,” Guzman says. “Everyone may be able to access the education system, but everyone doesn’t have the equity they need to be successful in the education system. This is the difference between equality and equity.”
Guzman adds that pushing for equality without pushing for equity, is almost counterproductive.
“This is about keeping the disadvantaged, disadvantaged. When people have been privileged all of their lives, equality or equity for others can be misinterpreted as oppression. What is coming across oppressive here is discounting the people who need more help than others as lacking merit, when they are being bombarded with criticism and stripped of assistance in the process of trying to obtain said merit through their education,” Guzman said. “How is that unlike anyone else in college or who has graduated from a college program? Where does said merit come from? How does one build merit if not through quality and equitable education?”
The college is operating with the same funding it has had since December, which may cause issues in the future.
Guzman adds that, “We continue the work we have been doing. However, there is a serious threat to the future,” she said.
Guzman added as of right now, everything continues as usual. However, should the Trump administration move forward with their threats, students may see a drastic change in the programs available to them.
“Right now, those are all threats, we cannot foresee what the true impact will be,” Guzman said. “The threats we hear are for severe cuts and even elimination of programs that serve African American students as well as other minorities and undocumented students.”
DEI programs affect more than just African American students, according to Guzman. They protect the equity and access of the LGBTQ+ community, disabled community, veteran community, to women, people of different walks of religion, etc. All of these groups are threatened by the cuts to these programs. There is talk of different strategies that can be used, like changing the names of these programs to make them more inconspicuous, combining programs, recreating our own infrastructure for equity within our state and even just district by district, but nothing has been set in stone.
“A memorandum was sent to all California colleges from our state chancellor, Sonya Christian, in summary saying that we commit to the work we are doing,” Guzman said. “Although this directive from the federal government has come to our colleges, demanding for the elimination of DEI programs, the state of California recognizes our commitment to serve. We recognize the power states have over their educational programs, versus the federal government and how states can exercise this power.”
ARC Vice President Angela Milano and the Student Services Vice President David Miramontes-Quiñones say that the ARC administration will remain “vigilant and proactive” when it comes to the college’ DEI programs.
“While these programs have not been directly impacted at this time, the possibility of future threats is real.” Milano said in an email to the Current. “The value and necessity of these programs are grounded in data, student voice, and institutional equity goals. Our commitment is unwavering, but the landscape is shifting, and we must prepare to defend and protect what has been proven to work for our students.”
Milano stressed that these programs do more than just help minority students succeed in college. It’s a bridge to more opportunities, a safe space to network, and for some of them this is a stepping stone to make friends, build bonds with and become a part of the college community as newcomers in our society.
“Ultimately, these programs are not just services—they are lifelines, bridges to opportunity, and affirmations of belonging. Their preservation is a shared responsibility, and by showing up, speaking out, and acting together, we can ensure they remain in place for generations to come,” VP Miramontes-Quiñones said in an email.
