Federal Investigation at George Mason University: A Review of Compliance with Civil Rights and Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction to the Department of Justice Compliance Review

The United States Department of Justice (DOJ) has formally notified George Mason University (GMU) of a new compliance review investigation. The announcement, made by the DOJ Office of Public Affairs on July 21, follows other recent inquiries into the university’s practices. In a letter addressed to the GMU Board of Visitors and legal counsel, the DOJ specified that the investigation is being conducted pursuant to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Legal Framework and Implications under Title VI

The investigation centers on GMU’s obligations as a recipient of federal financial assistance. Under Title VI, institutions receiving such funding must adhere to strict anti-discrimination requirements. The DOJ’s review aims to determine if GMU is in compliance with these mandates, which are designed to ensure students have unfettered access to the university’s educational environment, programs, and benefits without discrimination based on race, ethnicity, national origin, or shared ancestry. Potential actions to ensure compliance could range from voluntary agreements to formal measures, including:

• Suspension, termination, or refusal of federal financial assistance.
• Commencement of a civil action.

The university was given a deadline of August 1 to provide a series of certifications, responses, and materials as requested by the DOJ.

Alignment with UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This federal investigation directly intersects with several key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), highlighting the role of educational institutions in fostering equitable and just societies.

1. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

   The core of the investigation aligns with SDG 10, which calls for reducing inequality within and among countries. The probe into alleged discriminatory practices at GMU directly addresses Target 10.3: “Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices.” By scrutinizing the university’s compliance with anti-discrimination laws, the DOJ’s action seeks to uphold principles of equality and ensure that access to educational opportunities is not impeded by an individual’s race, color, or national origin.

2. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   The compliance review is an exercise in strengthening institutional accountability, a central tenet of SDG 16. This goal aims to “promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels.” The DOJ, as a primary justice institution, is enforcing national laws to ensure that another key public institution, the university, operates in a non-discriminatory and accountable manner (Target 16.6). This process reinforces the rule of law and promotes equal access to justice.

3. SDG 4: Quality Education

   A quality education, as defined by SDG 4, is predicated on an inclusive and safe learning environment. The investigation supports Target 4.7, which includes ensuring that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including through education for human rights and the promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence. An environment free from discrimination, disparate treatment, and harassment is a fundamental prerequisite for achieving this goal and providing a quality educational experience for all students.

University Response and Official Statements

In a public statement, the George Mason University Board of Visitors acknowledged receipt of the DOJ’s letter and affirmed its cooperation. The statement noted, “Our attorneys are communicating with the DOJ and are working with the University to respond fully to the Government’s requests.”

Reinforcing the investigation’s purpose, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon stated in a DOJ press release, “No one should be denied access to opportunity or resources because of their race, color, or national origin, and the United States is committed to keeping our universities free of such invidious bias.” This Title VI investigation is situated within a broader context of scrutiny regarding alleged discrimination on campus, including other federal probes and criticism over the university’s response to incidents of alleged anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.

Analysis of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 4: Quality Education

  The article centers on an investigation into George Mason University, an institution of higher education. The core issue is ensuring that the educational environment is free from discrimination, which is a fundamental component of providing quality and inclusive education for all students.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  This goal is directly addressed as the investigation focuses on alleged discrimination based on “race, ethnicity, national origin, or shared ancestry.” The entire premise of the Department of Justice’s action is to combat discriminatory practices and ensure equal opportunity, which is the central aim of SDG 10.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The article details the actions of a key government institution, the Department of Justice (DOJ), enforcing national laws (Title VI of the Civil Rights Act). This represents the functioning of justice systems to uphold the rule of law and hold other institutions, like the university, accountable for their practices to ensure they are inclusive and non-discriminatory.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• SDG 4: Quality Education

  • Target 4.5: By 2030, eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable, including persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples and children in vulnerable situations.

    The investigation aims to ensure students have “unfettered access to the school’s educational environment… without discrimination… on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, or shared ancestry.” This directly aligns with the target of ensuring equal access for all, particularly for groups that may be vulnerable to discrimination.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  • Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.

    The DOJ’s investigation into GMU’s alleged discriminatory practices in both student experience and faculty hiring is a direct effort to promote the inclusion of all individuals regardless of their race, ethnicity, or origin within the university community.

  • Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices and promoting appropriate legislation, policies and action in this regard.

    The article highlights an action (the DOJ investigation) intended to scrutinize and potentially eliminate discriminatory practices at GMU. The investigation itself is a measure to ensure equal opportunity in both education and employment at the university.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  • Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.

    The DOJ’s investigation is an application of the “rule of law,” specifically “Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.” It is a mechanism to provide access to justice for individuals who may have faced discrimination.

  • Target 16.b: Promote and enforce non-discriminatory laws and policies for sustainable development.

    This target is explicitly demonstrated in the article. The DOJ is actively enforcing a non-discriminatory law (Title VI) to ensure that a federally-funded institution adheres to anti-discrimination requirements, as stated in the press release: “the United States is committed to keeping our universities free of such invidious bias.”

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Indicators for SDG 4 and SDG 10

  • Existence of policies and compliance mechanisms to ensure non-discriminatory access.

    The article implies this indicator through the DOJ’s “compliance review investigation.” The review itself is a process to check whether GMU has and follows policies that ensure non-discrimination.

  • Data on student and faculty composition, disaggregated by race and ethnicity.

    This is implied by the DOJ’s request for “productions of information, data, and materials” and the focus on “discriminatory hiring practices.” Such data is essential to assess whether discrimination is occurring.

  • Reports of discrimination or harassment.

    The investigation itself, which followed “multiple campus incidents involving alleged discrimination,” implies that reports of discrimination (related to official indicator 10.3.1/16.b.1) are a key measure of the problem.

• Indicators for SDG 16

  • Existence and enforcement of non-discriminatory laws.

    The article is a direct example of this indicator. It explicitly mentions the law being enforced (“Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964”) and the body enforcing it (the Department of Justice).

  • Number of compliance reviews or investigations into discriminatory practices.

    The “new investigation” announced by the DOJ is a quantifiable action that serves as an indicator of an institution (the DOJ) working to hold another institution (GMU) accountable, thereby measuring progress towards Target 16.6 (effective, accountable institutions).

4. Summary Table of Findings

Source: campusreform.org