Discriminatory “Donor Intent” v. The Civil Rights Laws – EPP’s Complaint Against Florida State University
The U.S. Dept. of Education has opened an investigation after an Equal Protection Project complaint regarding 32 scholarships with discriminatory donor intent. This puts the universities between a rock (the law) and a hard place (contractually binding donor intent).
The Equal Protection Project filed a civil rights complaint regarding 32 scholarships at Florida State University. The case was recently opened for investigation by the U.S. Department of Education. For details on the scholarships, EPP’s Civil Rights Complaint, and the opening of the investigation, see our prior post, Dept. Education To Investigate 32 Florida State Discriminatory Scholarships After Equal Protection Project Complaint.
What’s most interesting about this case is how Florida State included the discriminatory donor intent in the description of the scholarships. For example:
Crockett Family Fund for Excellence
Link: https://fsu.academicworks.com/opportunities/35068 Archived Link: https://archive.ph/wip/iVg3o
Discriminatory Requirement: “Any student may apply to be considered for the award; however, it is the preference of the donor that the recipient be an African American/Black student.” [emphasis added]
Yet Florida State in statements to the media says the scholarships are open to everyone. Why then would Florida State include that donor intent language in the description if Florida State did not intend to honor that donor intent? And even if Florida State disregarded the donor intent, including that donor intent in the scholarship description would dissuade other groups from applying.
This presents a very major problem for universities: Must they honor discriminatory donor intent? This puts the universities between a rock (the law) and a hard place (contractual donor intent).
I had a chance to discuss the case with Eben Brown on the Fox News Rundown podcast.
The Trump administration has opened a federal civil rights investigation into Florida State University (FSU) over 32 scholarships accused of discriminating against students based on race or sex, according to a Department of Education (DOE). The investigation stems from a July 2025 complaint filed by the Equal Protection Project (EPP) that targeted 32 FSU scholarships. The DOE’s lists all 32 programs and confirms FSU is a recipient of federal financial assistance and therefore must comply with Title VI and Title IX.
FOX’s Eben Brown speaks with Professor William Jacobson, founder and president of the Equal Protection Project (EPP) and Cornell Law professor, who says that FSU stood out even among the hundreds of colleges and universities his organization has challenged.
Among the issues we discussed is how promoting scholarships in a discriminatory manner in and of itself is a violation of law, and how it makes no legal difference that it’s private money since the scholarship are run through the university. Listen below (sorry, no transcript).
[If audio player does not load, click here]
Reminder: we are a small organization going up against powerful and wealthy government and private institutions devoted to DEI discrimination. Donations are greatly needed and appreciated.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Colleges: “That damn EPP! First, we got dinged for taking donations from rich, convicted pedophiles. Now, we’re getting heat for taking donations from bigots!”
It is the preference of the donor that a recipient be a Caucasian/White Student.
Would just love to see how well that one would go over with the Florida State University administration.
Substituting “white” or “Christian” for any other racial or religious group is the acid test. If it makes you wince, it’s probably illegal.
How about a scholarship that is open to anyone EXCEPT Jews?
Seem like if its private donor, the donor ought to have some control over how the donation is used. Maybe they could could set up scholarship for black american history, under the presumption that blacks are going to get awarded most of the time.
If the donor wants to be a racist, they can fully administer the grants themselves. What they can’t do is have a state-funded university act as their agent for discrimination.
The university faced with a donor intent that is illegal and a violation of law couuld have returned the donation to the donor or the donor’s estate if deceased or asked the donor or donor estate if it would remove the preference. But a private individual’s preference cannot involve a public body or university to honor the preference over the law. The comment about flipping the script to a white preference (the “smell test” is a good way to show how illegal it would be regarded under that script.