The Union Scholars Program: Background and Original Structure

The Union Scholars Program, launched in 2003 by the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), offers a six-week summer internship focused on union organizing campaigns. It provides selected participants with a $4,800 stipend, up to $6,000 in need-based assistance, paid housing, and hands-on experience in labor activism. Originally designed to introduce college students passionate about social justice and workers' rights to the labor movement, the program was created in partnership with Harvard Law School's Center for Labor and a Just Economy (CLJE).

Harvard's involvement goes beyond initial collaboration. The university hosts the program's orientation sessions, offers ongoing logistical and promotional support, and prominently features it on CLJE's resources, effectively branding it as a Harvard-backed initiative. This connection has drawn scrutiny, as Harvard receives substantial federal funding, subjecting its programs to anti-discrimination laws.

Initially, eligibility criteria explicitly targeted 'students of color' or those from a 'historically marginalized community'—phrasing often interpreted as a proxy for non-white undergraduates, specifically sophomores or juniors with a minimum 2.5 GPA. This race-conscious approach aligned with broader Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) efforts prevalent in higher education during the 2010s and early 2020s, aiming to address historical underrepresentation in labor leadership.

The Legal Complaint: Allegations of Title VI Violations

On December 7, 2025, the Equal Protection Project (EPP), a nonprofit legal watchdog founded by Harvard Law alumnus William A. Jacobson, filed an 11-page complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice's (DOJ) Civil Rights Division. The filing accused the Union Scholars Program—and by extension, Harvard—of racial discrimination under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Title VI prohibits recipients of federal financial assistance, like Harvard (which gets billions annually for research), from discriminating on the basis of race, color, or national origin. EPP argued that the program's race-restricted eligibility mirrored the race-based admissions struck down by the Supreme Court in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College (SFFA v. Harvard) in 2023. Chief Justice John Roberts' majority opinion emphasized that eliminating racial classifications promotes true equality, rejecting diversity justifications that burden non-minority applicants.

Key allegations included: Harvard's active promotion via CLJE; hosting events; and endorsing a program that excludes white and Asian students based solely on race. Jacobson stated, 'What doesn’t Harvard understand about not discriminating based on race? The US Supreme Court told Harvard to stop; now it’s up to the Department of Justice to make Harvard stop.' EPP sought an investigation, injunction against race-based eligibility, and compensatory remedies.

Swift Changes: Removal of the 'Students of Color' Requirement

Following the complaint's filing and coverage in the New York Post on December 8, 2025, AFSCME quietly updated the program's website. The explicit requirement to 'be a college student of a historically marginalized community' was scrubbed, replaced with neutral criteria: undergraduate sophomore or junior status, 2.5 GPA minimum, and demonstrated interest in social justice.

Applications for the 2026 cohort opened with the revised language, deadline February 28, 2026. EPP attorney Robert Fox noted, 'Harvard isn’t a bystander; it hosts the orientation, provides support, and promotes the program. By putting its name on a race-restricted opportunity, Harvard is engaging in unlawful discrimination.' Neither Harvard nor AFSCME commented publicly on the revision, but the timing suggests preemptive compliance to avert DOJ action.

• Pre-complaint: Race-based exclusion via 'historically marginalized' proxy.
• Post-update: Open to all qualified undergraduates, broadening access.
• Implication: Aligns with SFFA's mandate against racial stereotypes.

Harvard's Evolving DEI Landscape Post-SFFA

The Union Scholars shift reflects broader transformations at Harvard since the 2023 SFFA ruling, which ended race-conscious admissions at public and private universities. Harvard reported a decline in Black freshman enrollment from 18% in 2023 to 14% in 2024 and 11.5% for the Class of 2029, with Hispanic at 11% (down from 16%) and Asian American rising to 41%.

In April 2025, Harvard renamed its Office of Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging to the Office for Community and Campus Life amid Trump administration pressures to dismantle DEI structures. The university also discontinued its 50-year-old Undergraduate Minority Recruitment Program (UMRP) in September 2025 under federal scrutiny.

These moves respond to a surge in Title VI complaints against race-exclusive scholarships, fellowships, and fly-in programs nationwide. For instance, Ithaca College faced a DOJ probe over similar initiatives.

Explore career paths in this evolving field via higher ed career advice on AcademicJobs.com.

Photo by Julia Rodriguez on Unsplash

Stakeholder Reactions and Perspectives

Conservative groups like EPP hail the change as a victory for colorblind equality. Jacobson, a Cornell Law professor, emphasized, 'The Harvard Union Scholars Program provides very valuable benefits to students, and it should be open without regard to race.'

Progressive voices worry about diminished pipelines for underrepresented students in labor activism. Labor advocates argue socioeconomic proxies could sustain diversity without racial classifications, though data shows persistent gaps: Black and Latino enrollment drops at 27 elite schools post-SFFA.

Higher ed leaders navigate a tightrope. Harvard President Alan Garber has defended holistic admissions emphasizing personal experiences over race, but critics demand full DEI audits. Faculty perspectives vary, with some CLJE scholars continuing labor-focused work sans racial mandates.

For faculty insights, check Rate My Professor.

Legal Risks and Challenges for University-Sponsored Programs

Post-SFFA, over 50 complaints target DEI initiatives, from scholarships to mentorships. Key risks include:

• Title VI/VII exposure: Federal funding loss or lawsuits if race factors in.
• Private suits: Groups like SFFA extend challenges beyond admissions.
• Reputational harm: Public backlash divides campuses.
• Operational shifts: Rewriting criteria demands legal review.

Universities mitigate via class-based (e.g., first-gen, low-income) or merit-focused alternatives, proven effective at institutions like UT Austin.

Enrollment Impacts and Diversity Strategies

Harvard Law School saw Black enrollment halve post-SFFA, from prior levels. Nationally, Black freshman shares fell at most elites by 2025. Universities counter with:

• Targeted outreach to high-achieving low-SES students.
• Topical essays revealing adversity without race mention.
• Partnerships with community colleges serving diverse populations.

Statistics underscore urgency: Pre-SFFA, race-boosted admits comprised 40-50% of underrepresented minorities at Ivies; now, holistic reviews must suffice.Harvard Crimson analysis.

Toward Inclusive Alternatives: Actionable Steps for Institutions

To thrive sans racial preferences:

1. Audit programs: Review for proxies; consult counsel.
2. Adopt merit + need: GPA, essays, financial aid bundles.
3. Build pipelines: K-12 partnerships, test-optional policies.
4. Train staff: Implicit bias to viewpoint diversity.

Success stories: MIT boosted low-income admits 20% via expanded recruitment. AcademicJobs.com offers scholarships and faculty positions emphasizing inclusive excellence.

Photo by The Jopwell Collection on Unsplash

Future Outlook for DEI in American Higher Education

With Trump-era executive orders targeting DEI (e.g., 2025 funding threats), expect more probes. Yet, resilient institutions pivot to 'belonging' frameworks, fostering excellence for all. Harvard's adaptations signal adaptation over abolition.

Professionals eyeing academia: Leverage higher ed jobs, professor salaries insights, and academic CV tips. In conclusion, visit Rate My Professor, higher ed jobs, career advice, university jobs, and post a job to engage with this dynamic sector.