INDEPENDENT SINCE 1880
The Corne¬ Daily Sun Vol. 141 No. 23
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 19, 2025 n ITHACA, NEW YORK
16 Pages – Free
News
Science
Arts
Weather
Faculty Finances
Sustainable Switch
Risky Romance
Cloudy
Members of the Faculty Senate raise concerns over a new video surveillance system and recent financial challenges. | Page 4
Cornell is transitioning from its current steam heating system to a sustainable hot water network. | Page 8
Nicholas York ’27 explores why Steven Soderbergh’s Black Bag is the most romantic film of the year. | Page 14
HIGH: 65º LOW: 40º
Cornellians Sue Trump Administration Cornell Removes Mentions of Over First Amendment Violations DEI from EEO Statement By AVERY WANG Sun Senior Writer
March 17 — A Cornell professor and two graduate students are suing the federal government, claiming that the enforcement of two of the Trump administration’s national security-related executive orders violates their First and Fifth Amendment rights. Two of the plaintiffs — Momodou Taal, a Ph.D. candidate in Africana studies, and Sriram Parasurama, a Ph.D. student in plant sciences — are prominent pro-Palestinian protesters on campus. The third plaintiff is Prof. Mukoma Wa Ngugi literatures in English, who is affiliated with the Africana Studies and Research Center.
“Only in a dictatorship can the leader jail and banish political opponents for criticizing his administration.” Momodou Taal, Ph.D The three now “fear government retaliation” for engaging in “constitutionally protected expression critical of U.S. foreign policy and supportive of Palestinian human rights,” according to the lawsuit. Along with the plaintiff’s co-counsel, the American-Arab AntiDiscrimination Committee filed a formal complaint on their behalf to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York on Saturday. Mahmoud Khalil, a pro-Palestinian demonstration leader and recent
Columbia master’s graduate, was arrested by officials from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security on March 8, despite being a lawful U.S. resident on a green card. His arrest represents the first carried out under the Trump administration in connection to college protest activity, with the president warning it is the “first arrest of many.” The complaint alleges that the two executive orders, which target protecting Americans from foreign nationals and combating antisemitism, are unconstitutional since their enforcement has created a “chilling effect” on their right to free speech. The complaint also alleges that both executive orders are unconstitutionally vague and the “severe” threat of deportation or criminal prosecution “based on vague, subjective, and overbroad standards that grant unfettered discretion to government officials” raises due process concerns under the Fifth Amendment. “Because each executive order fails to provide sufficient notice of the type of speech barred, it denies Plaintiffs’ due process right to conform their speech to the orders,” the lawsuit states. The plaintiffs have motioned for a national injunction to temporarily halt the government’s enforcement of parts of the two executive orders while their constitutionality is examined. “Only in a dictatorship can the leader jail and banish political opponents for criticizing his administration. A nationwide injunction is therefore necessary while the Court considers the merits,” Taal stated in a press release.
‘An Amorphous and Subjective Standard’: Jan. 20 Executive Order On Jan. 20, President Donald Trump announced an executive order titled Protecting the United States From Foreign Terrorist and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats. The order recommends the government take “any actions necessary to protect the American people from the actions of foreign nationals who have undermined or seek to undermine the fundamental constitutional rights of the American people.”
“[The Jan. 20 executive order] imposes an amorphous and subjective standard for what constitutes a ‘hostile attitude’ toward U.S. ‘government.’” The Lawsuit The plaintiffs claim that the government’s standards are too “vague,” allowing government officials to enforce severe penalties, such as deportation or criminal prosecution. “[The Jan. 20 executive order] imposes an amorphous and subjective standard for what constitutes a ‘hostile attitude’ toward U.S. ‘government,’ ‘institutions,’ ‘culture,’ or ‘founding principles,’ depriving Plaintiffs of fair notice and sweeping up substantial amounts of protected speech,” the lawsuit states.
To continue reading this article, please visit www.cornellsun.com. Avery Wang can be reached at awang@cornellsun.com.
KARLIE MCGANN / SUN PHOTOGRAPHY EDITOR
Students sue | Momodou Taal, an international graduate student who once faced the potential revocation of his visa, is among three suing the federal government over free speech concerns.
By EMMA GALGANO Sun Staff Writer
March 17 — Cornell has cut out several mentions of race; references to diversity, equity and inclusion and resources for filing discrimination complaints from its Equal Education and Employment Opportunity Statement. The revision follows the U.S. Department of Education intensifying its scrutiny of race-conscious policies. In a letter sent on Feb. 14, the ED directed federally funded academic institutions to eliminate racial preferences in admissions, hiring and programming within two weeks. An EEO statement is a formal declaration of an organization’s commitment to equal employment opportunity, outlining protections under federal law and explaining how employees and applicants can file a complaint if they believe they have experienced discrimination. An EEO tagline is typically a concise statement conveying the core values expressed in the EEO statement to be used in job postings and company materials. While the previous statement explicitly referenced discrimination on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation, disability and 14 other legally protected statutes, the University’s revised EEO statement as of March 17 only refers to the support for individuals with disabilities and veterans. Since May 2005, Cornell’s previous EEO statement underscored the University’s commitment to diversity and inclusion, stating, “Cornell University’s history of diversity and inclusion encourages all students, faculty, and staff to support a diverse and inclusive university in which to work, study, teach, research, and serve.” The previous statement additionally directed employees to University resources addressing bias, discrimination and misconduct through the Office of Institutional Equity and Title IX. The revised statement now reads: “Cornell University is an Equal Opportunity Employer and Educator supporting individuals with disabilities and veterans. Learn more at hr.cornell.edu/EEO.” While the revised EEO tagline includes several of the omitted categories from the EEO statement, such as race and gender, both the new tagline and statement lack resources for applicants and employees to file discrimination complaints, such as contact information for the Office of
Institutional Equity and Title IX or details on accommodations for disabled students and employees. A reference to being an affirmative action employer was removed from the statement and information about “recognizing a lawful preference in employment practices for Native Americans living on or near Indian reservations” was taken out of the tagline. When asked by The Sun why the University removed explicit references to DEI initiatives and discrimination resources from the EEO statement, Cornell Media Relations did not offer comment by time of publication. According to the webpage, the updated language is pending review and approval by the Board of Trustees. The trustees will convene in Ithaca on March 20 and March 21. In recent job postings, Cornell has utilized its revised EEO tagline. On Feb. 14, Craig Trainor, the ED’s acting assistant secretary for civil rights, ordered federally funded institutions, including Cornell, to eliminate racial preferences in admissions, hiring and programming, or risk investigation and loss of funding. Trainor cited the 2023 Supreme Court case Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which ruled affirmative action admissions programs unconstitutional. However, Trainor extended the case’s scope in the Feb. 14 letter to include “hiring, promotion, compensation, financial aid, scholarships, prizes, administrative support, discipline, housing, graduation ceremonies, and all other aspects of student, academic, and campus life.” The ED released a “Frequently Asked Questions” document on Feb. 28, clarifying that not all diversity programs are banned, as long as all initiatives remain open to all students. The ED emphasized case-by-case assessments rather than blanket prohibitions of diversity initiatives in educational programs, signaling a more flexible interpretation of Title VI. Cornell has cut out several mentions of race; references to diversity, equity and inclusion and resources for filing discrimination complaints from its Equal Education and Employment Opportunity Statement. The revision follows the U.S. Department of Education intensifying its scrutiny of race-conscious policies. Emma Galgano can be reached at egalgano@cornellsun.com.