Appeal Dropped

From the Daily Bruin: The Trump administration dropped its appeal of a decision Friday that blocked it from demanding a $1.2 billion settlement from UCLA. The federal government froze $584 million in research funding to UCLA in late July, alleging that the university allowed antisemitism, affirmative action and “men to participate in women’s sports.” The Trump administration sent a letter to UCLA on Aug. 8 demanding that, in exchange for the restoration of the funds, the university pay a $1 billion fine and $172 million in a claims fund for people impacted by alleged violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Federal district judge Rita F. Lin temporarily restored the vast majority of UCLA’s frozen grants in two decisions in August and September...

Lin blocked the proposed fine – and prevented the federal government from freezing or threatening to freeze more of the UC’s research funding – in an Nov. 14 decision on a lawsuit brought by UC employees... U.S. Department of Justice attorneys filed the appeal Jan. 13 in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals but later filed a motion that said it would dismiss the appeal if Lin made certain changes to her November temporary injunction, which she agreed to in a Friday order.

The DOJ attorneys requested that Lin change the text of her injunction to clarify that civil rights investigations and litigations may result in voluntary resolutions between the UC and federal government, so long as the Trump administration follows proper procedures...

Full story at https://dailybruin.com/2026/02/13/trump-administration-drops-appeal-of-order-blocking-1-2-billion-ucla-settlement.

Our Annual Valentine

Our annual posting for Valentines Day. Sadly, the happy couple divorced a few years later. But why dwell on that fact? Let's instead say that all's well even if it doesn't end well.

Or direct to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0dGRDvmO54.

Straws in the Wind - Part 253

From the Cornell Daily Sun: The Presidential Task Force on Institutional Voice released their final recommendations on how and when Cornell should issue official statements on social and political issues*... 

==== 

*https://provost.cornell.edu/_assets/document/presidential-task-force-institutional-voice-final-report.pdf.

====

The statement specifically called for “institutional restraint” when making decisions about when to comment on issues. The recommendations propose that Cornell limit official statements to situations that are directly connected to the University’s mission and values. “By limiting institutional voice to matters germane to the University’s mission and to higher education, Cornell respects and protects the individual voices of faculty, staff, and students as they exercise their freedom to speak,” the statement reads.

After what top administrators described as “extensive review and discussion” with faculty members,staff, students and shared governance bodies across Cornell’s campuses, the task force released a 19 -page document on its final recommendations, which will “guide administrative responses to external events,” according to the statement. The task force was convened to examine when and how the University should speak “institutionally on issues of social and political significance,” according to the statement. This approach, the administration stated, is intended to prevent the University from taking positions on issues that fall outside of its academic and educational scope, according to the recommendations report.

...Defining when the University should speak on an issue was one of President Michael Kotlikoff’s first presidential actions, announced in August...

Full story at https://www.cornellsun.com/article/2026/02/cornell-presidential-task-force-on-institutional-voice-releases-final-report-on-institutional-speech-guidelines.

Will Harvard Continue to Lead the Charge? - Part 121

From the NY Times: The Trump administration sued Harvard University on Friday, accusing the Ivy League school of failing to produce documents sought as part of a Justice Department investigation into whether its admissions process discriminates against white applicants. The lawsuit is the second government action against Harvard in the two weeks since President Trump abruptly reversed his position on a potential deal to end the administration’s pressure campaign on the university.

After a report in The New York Times on Feb. 2 that Mr. Trump had agreed to give up his demand for Harvard to pay a $200 million fine in order to help finalize a deal, the president responded on social media with a series of late-night and early morning posts that called for a criminal investigation of Harvard and announced that he had increased the fine to $1 billion. Four days later, the Defense Department severed its academic ties with Harvard...

Full story at https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/13/us/politics/harvard-lawsuit-admissions-doj-trump.html.

I'm tired. This is boring. What time is it?

Yours truly tuned in via Zoom to the meeting yesterday of the systemwide Assembly of Academic Senate. On the agenda were 1) changes in the procedures for faculty discipline (basically speeding them up) to meet the Regents' new requirements; 2) removing "affirmative action" from the name and wording of a Senate committee; and 3) demanding policies that would require notifying anyone whose name was requested by the feds.

All of these items might seem likely to provoke controversy. But the first two were passed overwhelmingly with no real discussion. The third was the product of a series of Assembly meetings that modified the proposed resolution. But at this meeting, there was a motion to table the resolution, i.e., have no discussion and no vote on the substance. There was also a strong vote to table. And the meeting ended early.

New Industry?

Facebook ad

Apparently, there is an organization - which may be an offshoot of America First Legal - formed with the intent of suing UC for reverse discrimination. Yours truly spotted the Facebook ad shown on this posting on Feb. 10. If you click on the ad, the following information appears:

SARD is a new organization, founded in the fall of 2024, by a coalition of people who have observed the University of California's brazen reversion to the use of large racial preferences in its admissions practices. We include students (and parents of students) who have been rejected by the UC schools even as classmates with substantially lower academic credentials -- but a more favorable skin pigmentation -- have been accepted. We include academics who have served on UC admissions committees, or studied UC admissions practices, and have been shocked by the university's use of quota-like policies to radically distort its admissions standards. And we include public interest lawyers who believe that a suit against UC for these practices can and will be successful...

The group filed a lawsuit against the Regents dated Feb. 3, 2025, on behalf of unnamed White and Asian applicants, which can be found at:

https://sard.law/static/sard/pdf/COMPL%20Students%20Against%20Racial%20Discrimination%20v.%20University%20of%20California%20Complaint.66ef1c3f72fc.pdf and

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.956209/gov.uscourts.cacd.956209.51.0.pdf.

The case is now in the discovery phase.

Straws in the Wind - Part 252

From Inside Higher Ed: North Carolina State University fired the assistant director of its LGBTQ Pride Center on Friday after an anti-DEI activist group secretly recorded him appearing to violate system policies... Employees who were secretly recorded by Accuracy in Media at the University of North Carolina campuses in Charlotte and Asheville and Western Carolina University no longer work at those institutions.

“We’re still able to do the things that we want to do, have these events and programs. We have to be a little more careful,” Jae Edwards, the N.C. State employee, was recorded saying. “It’s been very interesting navigating now that there’s certain words we can’t use anymore … ’cause things like ‘equity’ implies inequities,” he said. “As a marginalized group, we’re used to these things, and we’re used to going around them and finding ways around.”

A spokesperson for the university told the News & Observer the institution was made aware of the video on Thursday, Feb. 5. “The individual seen in the video had no role in policy or compliance decisions and was not authorized to speak on behalf of the university,” the spokesperson said. “The staff member no longer works at the university..." 

Full story at https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2026/02/09/nc-state-fires-secretly-recorded-lgbtq-pride-employee.