OCR COMPLAINT: Indiana University

On April 9, 2025 Defending Education (DE) brings this complaint against Indiana University (IU) for discrimination on the basis of race in programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance in violation of both Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq., and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. DE brings this complaint as an interested third-party organization with members who are parents of students throughout the country. DE and its members oppose, among other things, discrimination on the basis of race in America’s K-12 schools and institutions of higher education. IU Indianapolis’s (IUIN) School of Education offers the “Patricia Payne Scholarship for Teacher Candidates.”1 Specific eligibility for this IUIN scholarship are as follows:

Awarded to undergraduate students in the School of Education or graduate students enrolled in a teacher preparation program. Special consideration will be given to underrepresented populations, including but not limited to financially challenged students, and/or students with diverse cultural experiences. Preference will be given to African American students who intend to teach in traditional public schools.2

The scholarship application process for current and incoming IU students is administered through IU’s Office of the Vice President for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (OVPDEI).3 Its website lists many other race-selective scholarships expressing that applicants will be given preference if they are African American or Native American.4 These scholarships include: (1) the “Johnson Underrepresented Student Scholarship” (specifying that “Preference will be given to African American students”), (2) the “Bruce Shuck Family Native American Scholarship” (specifying that “Preference [will be given] to students of Native American descent”), and the (3) “Wilma A. and Charles E. Harry, IV Family Scholarship” (specifying that “Preferences will be given to African American students”).5

The Patricia Payne Scholarship for Teacher Candidates, the Johnson Underrepresented Student Scholarship, the Bruce Shuck Family Native American Scholarship, and the Wilma A. and Charles E. Harry, IV Family Scholarship—all granted on a preferential basis to African American or Native American students—are financial benefits granted expressly and unapologetically on the basis of race in violation of Title VI and the Constitution’s 14th Amendment.6

Attached to this complaint is evidence of the racial discrimination in which IU is engaging through selection and administration of scholarship awards, including the Patricia Payne Scholarship for Teacher Candidates (Exhibit A-C).

As the Department of Education is no doubt aware, discrimination on the basis of race raises concerns that IU has received federal funds in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which declares that “no person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.”

In addition, Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution asserts: “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” On these grounds, the Supreme Court held in 1954 that racial segregation of students is unconstitutional. Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).

As recently as 2024, in Students for Fair Admission, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College,7 the Supreme Court struck down the racially discriminatory admission policies of Harvard College and the University of North Carolina as violative of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts noted that:

Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it. And the Equal Protection Clause, we have accordingly held, applies without regard to any differences of race, of color, or of nationality—it is universal in its application.… For the guarantee of equal protection cannot mean one thing when applied to one individual and something else when applied to a person of another color.… If both are not accorded the same protection, then it is not equal.8

And violations of the Equal Protection Clause, the Court confirmed, are also violations of Title VI: “discrimination that violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment committed by an institution that accepts federal funds also constitutes a violation of Title VI.”9

A September 29, 2015 decision from the Department of Education Office for Civil Rights during the Obama Administration is directly on point. In 2015, following “the police actions involving African American victims in Ferguson and New York and subsequent events,” Oak Park & River Forest High School District 200 held a “Black Lives Matter” assembly during Black History Month. The assembly was convened “for African American students only” because the district wanted “to provide a comfortable forum for black students to express their frustrations.” Certain students “who self-identified as white were directed by District officials not to participate in the event as this assembly was designed for students who self-identify as black.” In the letter sent on September 29, 2015 (OCR Docket #05-15-1180), OCR found that the district violated the Equal Protection Clause and Title VI because the district’s actions could not withstand strict scrutiny. Specifically, the district failed to “assess fully whether there were workable race-neutral alternatives” and “did not conduct a flexible and individualized review of potential participants.” In a Resolution Agreement with OCR, the district agreed that its programs and activities would be “open to all students . . . regardless of their race” and to adopt policies and training to ensure the district’s compliance. OCR imposed these requirements even though the district had promised “not to hold such events in the future.”

The Department’s own guidance on Title VI clarifies that covered educational programs and
activities may include, but are not limited to: “admissions, recruitment, financial aid, academic
programs, student treatment and services, counseling and guidance, discipline, classroom
assignment, grading, vocational education, recreation, physical education, athletics, and
housing.”10

Accordingly, we ask that the Department promptly investigate the allegations in this complaint,
act swiftly to remedy unlawful policies and practices, and order appropriate relief.