Trump Administration: Latest News and Live Updates

But in the past few weeks, Mr. Trump has turned to the same measures – not to help groups that have been historically discriminated against, but to remedy what he sees as the negative men.

The pattern fits a wider trend in the administration, since Trump officers choose which civil rights protection they want to enforce and for whom. Throughout the government, agencies that have worked historically to combat the discrimination against black, women and other groups forced to examine the institutions that are accused.

“The simple message that you convey is: If you think about it, talk about it or claim to be accessible to diversity, justice, inclusion, accessibility, you will be targeted,” said Maya Wiley, the President and Managing Director of the Leadership Conference on Citizens' Rights.

“They convey that white men are the most discriminated people in American society,” she added, “and therefore authorized to act positive.”

The White House has defended its actions as part of the efforts to prepare diversity before diversity.

“The Trump administration is dedicated to promoting equality, combating discrimination and promoting decisions on merit-based, as explained in the US constitution,” said Harrison Fields, a spokesman for the White House.

During his presidential campaign, Mr. Trump said about what he called “a definitive anti-white feeling in this country”. Now he has done a quick job in his second term to address it. He has made a great advance to exterminate programs that promote the diversity that he has proposed to keep the attitude of incompetent people.

In the past few weeks, agencies have initiated investigations that signal the shift in the administration in the enforcement of civil rights.

On Monday, the government announced that it had opened a civil rights examination to the city of Chicago to determine whether its mayor or others had set a pattern of discrimination by hiring a number of blacks in high -ranking positions.

The investigation was carried out after the mayor of Chicago, Brandon Johnson, had praised the number of blacks in Top City jobs during the comments in a local church. With the conversation with the communities, Mr. Johnson said that some of his critics had claimed that he only speaks about “the attitude of blacks”.

“No,” he continued. “I say that if you hire our employees, we always pay attention to everyone else. We are the most generous people on the planet.”

The head of the Civil Rights Department of the Ministry of Justice, Harmeet K. Dhillon, said the comments justified the examination of the city's attitudes to determine whether they were discriminated against people who are not black.

The office for civil rights in the education department examines whether the Chicago public school system violates the Civil Rights Act with its “Success Plan for Black Students” and claims that it prefers a group of academically below -average students to others.

And last month, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission initiated an investigation at Harvard University in which the school has been involved that the school has participated in discriminatory attitudes because it has shown a significant increase in the percentage of minority, women and non -binary faculties in the past ten years, while the installments for white men accepted.

In a letter to the university on April 25, the reigning chairman of the EEOC, Andrea R. Lucas, said that she started the investigation on the basis of the university's express request for “demographic diversification of the faculty”.

Ms. Lucas said she believed that the university may have violated the Civil Rights Act by deliberately treating individuals of certain groups than another protected class.

While she wrote that other groups could have been discriminated against, including Asians, men or heterosexual people who have applied for jobs or students, training programs, their justification focused almost exclusively on the results of the white men.

In her letter, Ms. Lucas quoted, who have since been called out of the university's archives, which showed that the percentage of the local white male faculties had dropped from 64 percent in 2013 to 56 percent in 2023. However, she found that white men made up 56 percent of the appropriate faculties, but only represented 32 percent of the Timesur Track Faculty.

The data, she wrote, gave her “reason to the assumption that these trends and the underlying pattern or the underlying discrimination on the basis of breed and gender were continued and continued in 2024.”

The EEOC examination, which was reported for the first time by the conservative news location The Washington Free Beacon, is one of several who started the administration in its struggle in order to arrange the country's oldest university to bow to the president's agenda.

Both the EEOC and Harvard refused to comment on a comment on this article.

Ms. Lucas' letter to Harvard became two days after the ban on legal theory that determines whether certain guidelines have disadvantaged certain groups, two days after the issue of an executive regulation that prohibits the use of “different effects”.

Conservatives have denounced different effects because it is based on result data in order to assert and demonstrate discrimination – the basis on which Ms. Lucas submitted her charges against Harvard.

Even those who have criticized the use of different effects in the past said that the EEOC examination had been hypocritical and retaliation.

“This is obviously hypocritical on his face,” said Michael J. Petrilli, President of Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a conservative Think Tank and a vocal critic of different effects analyzes. “Here the administration uses statistics to start an examination, and two weeks ago they said that they would ban this practice. So what is that?”

The EEOC, the main contestation of discrimination at the workplace, has become a powerful instrument for the Trump administration because it tries to put pressure on institutions that do not match the president's agenda.

Last month, it began to question the attitudes of 20 of the country's largest law firms, and claimed that their efforts to recruit black and Hispanic lawyers and to create a more diverse worker may have discriminated against white candidates.

The EEOC examination after Harvard was also unusual, said former EEOC officials.

The use of diversity statements and data as evidence is extremely rare, as is an indictment for this type of a commissioner and not by an individual who claims discrimination at work.

Jenny R. Yang, a former chairman of the Commission, said that the basis for the investigation would not carry out a strong case for different effects or different treatment theory.

“The pursuit of promoting diversity is not the same at all as taking into account the breed and gender in the event of an individual attitude decision,” said Ms. Yang. “They essentially do what they incorrectly incorrectly reduced different effects of doing.”

In a statement, Mr. Fields, the spokesman for the White House, confirmed the position of the government on Mr. Trump's civil rights goals and the president's symptoms against Harvard.

“The Trump government undertakes to promote equality, to combat anti-Semitism, to promote merit-based decisions and to enforce the basic conditions of government contracts,” said Fields.

But civil rights experts said that the goals of the government were clear.

Catherine E. Lhamon, who previously worked as head of the Office for Civil Rights in the Education Department, said that the investigation showed a pattern of the “performative misuse of Federal Law Law”.

“The transparent vendenda-controlled investigations by the Trump government categorically do not focus on fulfilling the congress guarantee that the non-discrimination against the federal government applies alike,” said Ms. Lhamon. “Civil rights, which are properly understood, do not rise against one group against another, but protect us all.”