Friday, April 25, the College of William and Mary’s board of visitors passed resolution HC-3 titled “Merit-based excellence, student opportunity and freedom from discrimination.”
This resolution was introduced in response to increasing pressure from the federal and state governments to restrict universities’ diversity, equity and inclusion programs. Across the country, this pressure has already led some institutions, like the University of Virginia, to eliminate their DEI programs entirely.
In contrast, the board of visitors’ resolution reaffirms the College’s commitment to a “values-based” and “merit-based” approach to education, without directly eliminating DEI.
“Therefore, be it resolved that the Board affirms William & Mary’s values-based and merit-based approach to advancing the success of all students before and after the attainment of their degrees,” the resolution said.
While HC-3 supports merit-based principles, it takes a neutral stance on DEI initiatives. The resolution affirms that College President Katherine A. Rowe must comply with any directives from federal or state authorities regarding DEI policies but did not announce changes to the Office of Diversity and Inclusion or the Center for Student Diversity.
“Be it finally resolved that the president shall continue to review guidance from the U.S. Department of Education, the U.S. Attorney General, the Virginia Attorney General, and other relevant federal and state agencies, and ensure full compliance with applicable laws,” the resolution said.
Several colleges and universities, such as Harvard, have lost federal funding after openly criticizing the Trump administration and refusing to implement its demands. The board’s resolution emphasizes the College’s long-standing principle of belonging in an apparent effort to rebrand inclusionary practices in a way that complies with federal demands on DEI.
“William & Mary highly values the full scope of scientific and scholarly experience, thought, talent, and expertise, and cultivates an environment of belonging, seeking to ensure access and opportunity for all who come here,” the resolution said.
HC-3 reflects the broader trend of the College’s neutral response to unprecedented policies set forth by the Trump administration. Earlier this week, over 150 colleges and universities signed a statement denouncing the Trump administration’s interference in the higher education sphere.
The College did not sign the letter — a decision Rowe explained to the full board Friday morning. She acknowledged it as difficult, but necessary to maintain a nonpartisan campus environment.
“We strive scrupulously to be politically neutral, because that opens the widest space for true deliberation on this campus, which we are here to foster,” Rowe said.
Towards the end of the meeting, the board of visitors overwhelmingly passed the merit-based resolution, adopting the Trump administration’s language while also reaffirming the College’s desire to welcome all students. Fourteen board members voted in favor of the resolution, and two voted against.
Board member Kendrick F. Ashton Jr. ’98 voted against the resolution. He said he found it to be an unfair assessment of the College’s leadership, as he observes that the College has prioritized anti-discriminatory practices for decades.
“I believe that very few people that are close to this university believe that it is engaged in any form of discrimination,” Ashton said. “I think this suggestion that leadership here is engaged in discrimination is misguided and uninformed.”
Ashton pointed out that the board has historically stayed silent on issues of anti-discriminatory legislation, and thus questioned the timing and intent behind the board’s resolution denouncing “discriminatory practices.” He felt the resolution lacked substance and appeared political, which made it difficult for him to support.
“There’s no statement that’s important or resolution to do anything,” Ashton said. “So why are we resolving now? I found it unnecessary. I found it to be political and unsubstantive, and as a consequence, while being firmly opposed to discrimination, I thought the suggestion, the implication and the rationale was just improper, unprincipled and I couldn’t be supportive of it.”
The second dissenting vote came from J.E. Lincoln Saunders ’06, who echoed Ashton’s concerns about the resolution’s political undertones. Saunders said he viewed the resolution as an overstep by the Virginia state government into the College’s academic affairs.
“From my perspective, knowing that this came down as essentially a mandate from the governor’s office, it felt to me like an overreach of the executive branch into the working of higher education,” Saunders said.
The board’s decision comes after campus-wide efforts to resist government pressure. Student Assembly presented its “You Belong” resolution during the full board meeting Friday. The document called upon the board to consider the importance of diversity programming, receiving positive feedback from board members, including former Republican Virginia state senator Thomas K. Norment Jr. J.D. ’73.
“I just wanted to compliment the students on that resolution,” Norment said. “The research that went into it, how you articulately and diplomatically presented your points on it — it was extraordinary.”
SA President Zoe Wang ’25 MPP ’26 listened to the board’s discussion of the “You Belong” resolution and believes their favorable reception of it may have led them to take a less definitive step when enacting HC-3.
“I definitely think the ‘You Belong’ resolution had an impact,” Wang said. “I think the resolution is their way of staying on the good side of the federal and state government while also not cutting our programs.”
While Wang expressed relief that the resolution did not directly dismantle the College’s diversity programming, she also voiced concerns about its vagueness.
“I’m glad that the resolution didn’t directly dissolve our diversity programming and offices, but it is very unclear,” Wang said. “I can’t even tell what the actionable steps from this resolution are, which means students can’t.”
SA Vice President Matt Swenson ’26 also noted the uncertainty surrounding HC-3’s practical effects.
“We’re still trying to figure out the practical impacts,” Swenson said. “My preliminary interpretation is it’s not right now going to change anything that we’re doing. But, that obviously is a very volatile situation.”
In response to the board’s passage of HC-3, Rowe sent an email to the campus community early Friday afternoon, reaffirming the College’s commitment to inclusion and highlighting the role of student leadership that was displayed with the creation of “You Belong.”
“This spring, I have heard from many in our community expressing their commitment to William & Mary’s mission of teaching, learning and research,” Rowe wrote. “I especially recognize our Student Assembly leadership for bringing forward the ‘You Belong’ resolution. This university’s dedication to advancing our work together with thoughtfulness and belonging is inspiring.”
Not all student groups were satisfied with the administration’s response. The College Socialists shared their frustration with the resolution in an Instagram post Friday evening.
“Rowe and the BOV have abandoned their responsibility to protect students,” the post’s caption said. “What we need is real student power, real democracy, and freedom from these oligarchs serving the right-wing billionaire agenda.”
