DOJ investigates California’s university plan targeting 1,100 faculty hires for civil rights violations

California – The Department of Justice announced Thursday it has launched an investigation into the University of California system over allegations that its employment practices may violate civil rights laws. At the center of the inquiry is the university’s “UC 2030 Capacity Plan,” a strategy aimed at diversifying faculty hiring across its campuses. The Justice Department is examining whether the plan’s use of race- and sex-based hiring targets runs afoul of federal anti-discrimination laws.

Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division emphasized that public employers are legally prohibited from discriminating on the basis of race, sex, or other protected categories. “Institutional directives that use race- and sex-based hiring practices expose employers to legal risk under federal law,” Dhillon stated. The investigation will focus on whether the University of California has engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The UC 2030 Capacity Plan sets specific goals to increase diversity in its faculty ranks. One key target is to recruit at least 40 percent of graduate students from the university’s own undergraduate programs as well as from Hispanic-serving institutions, historically Black colleges and universities, and tribal colleges. In addition, the plan calls for hiring 1,100 ladder-rank faculty members—full-time professors on a tenure track—over the coming years. The university asserts that these new hires will diversify its faculty because they are more representative of underrepresented groups than the current faculty.

While the university defends the plan as a way to promote inclusion and representation in academia, the Justice Department’s probe raises questions about how affirmative diversity efforts intersect with legal protections against discrimination. If the investigation finds that the university’s hiring practices unfairly disadvantage candidates based on race or sex, the institution could face fines and be required to compensate affected individuals.

This inquiry comes amid broader national debates about diversity initiatives and affirmative action policies in education and employment. Critics argue that policies explicitly considering race and sex in hiring risk violating equal protection principles, while supporters say such measures are necessary to address longstanding disparities and create equitable opportunities.

As the investigation unfolds, the University of California will likely face scrutiny not only over its hiring goals but also over the legal and ethical challenges involved in balancing diversity efforts with anti-discrimination laws. The outcome could have implications for other public institutions employing similar strategies in their efforts to diversify faculty and staff.