Ohio State University via Wikimedia Commons.
In late February, Ohio State University eliminated a dozen staff positions and shuttered two offices focused on diversity, equity and inclusion as a result of executive orders issued by President Donald Trump.
These closures occurred as the state legislature moved toward the passage of Senate Bill 1, sweeping legislation introduced by Ohio Republicans and designed to curb what they say is a liberal bias in higher education. Among other things, SB1 would: bar DEI considerations in training, recruiting and the offering of scholarships; ban full-time faculty from striking during contract negotiations; and restrict higher ed institutions from staking out positions on a range of “controversial” topics, including climate, marriage, abortion, immigration, and any other “belief or policy that is the subject of political controversy.” (The bill would still allow universities to endorse the U.S. Congress when it “establishes a state of armed hostility against a foreign power.”)
Collectively, these actions have sent some OSU staff members reeling.
“The mood is pretty dispirited,” said Carmen Winant, an Ohio State art professor and the Roy Lichtenstein endowed chair of studio art. “On the other hand, there’s still a lot of mobilization and solidarity to push back.”
To that end, Winant will join colleagues, students, politicians, union members and a diverse array of organizers in a “Shred SB1” rally at the William Thompson statue at the OSU Oval from 1-4 p.m. today (Tuesday, March 4). Organized by the American Association of University Professors-Ohio State (AAUP-OSU) and the Ohio Student Association, the protest is part of a statewide day of action aimed at drawing attention to SB1 and will feature: OSU faculty speakers representing more than 20 disciplines, including geography, physics, and African American studies; Democratic State Rep. Munira Abdullahi; union representatives from the Ohio Federation of Teachers, Wex Workers United, and IATSE Local 12; and representatives from student organizations such as National Society of Black Engineers, Students for Justice in Palestine and Jews for Justice Palestine, among others.
The protest takes place the same day Trump posted to social media threatening in violation of First Amendment protections to cut all federal funding from “any College, School, or University that allows illegal protests,” in addition to having protesters expelled, arrested, or even deported.
Previously, Winant had joined with AAUP-OSU to organize against SB83, an ideological forbear to SB1 that contained a number of the same provisions but failed to pass after being introduced in 2023. “SB1 is so similar to SB83; it’s like a copycat of a copycat,” Winant said. “And what are my impressions [of SB1]? It’s an ideological bill, and I don’t think anyone is pretending otherwise. As with SB83, it’s so far reaching and tries to do so many things, which is by design and makes it really hard to talk about. It’s hard to wrap your arms around the bill, because are we talking about making it more difficult to get and keep tenure? Are we talking about banning DEI initiatives and policies? Are we talking about not being able to teach quote-unquote ‘controversial’ topics in our classrooms? And it goes on and on and on, which … makes it hard to even know what to swing at. But, yeah, I think it’s rotten to the core and I haven’t spoken to a faculty member who feels otherwise about it.”
As a member of AAUP-OSU, Winant’s focus has focused on the faculty response to the potential legislation, though public opinion toward the bill has been largely unfavorable. Before being passed by the Ohio Senate, more than 1,000 people offered public comment against the legislation (more than 830 written testimonies, in addition to more than 200 people who appeared at the Ohio Statehouse in February to testify in opposition). By contrast, only 14 people submitted testimonies in support of the bill, which is anticipated at some point to reach the desk of Gov. Mike DeWine.
Winant said the introduction of SB1, along with the acquiescence of Ohio State president Ted Carter to funding cuts threatened by Trump over the existence of university DEI initiatives, had instilled a sense of fear in some faculty members that had impacted course instruction, including one who told Winant they were afraid to teach their students about Palestinian artists. “And these are people who are sane and decent and humane in their approach,” Winant said. “And even before these things have been instituted, they’re afraid.”
These fears are heightened by the broad language employed in SB1, which, for example, doesn’t actually define DEI, a term that has been weaponized by Republicans to attack a range of programs and policies, and which has increasingly been used to help advance segregationist practices.
“We know that DEI was an imperfect, super institutionalized and often corporatized response to institutional racism, segregation, and oppressive structures that have acted upon people of color for hundreds of years in this country,” Winant said. “But in simply tossing it, there’s a permission structure that’s put in place to do tremendous harm to people who are not cis, straight, white men.”
In an email, Jesse Vogel, a candidate for Columbus City Council in District 7, highlighted the bill’s broadside attack on the diversity initiatives that he said had benefited his sense of perspective in his time at Ohio State’s Moritz College of Law, where he encountered faculty members who held “diversity, equity and inclusion as core principals.” “I know that programs to support people of color, women, and LGBTQ folks in breaking barriers and achieving higher education make our community stronger,” he wrote. “We can’t go back.”
Despite the political headwinds, Winant said she and others have not given up hope that SB1 will either stall out in committee or be vetoed by DeWine. “There are some faculty who are already talking about this like it’s a done deal, which I think is a dangerous strategy,” Winant said. “We have to believe another fate is possible, another outcome is possible. Otherwise, we wouldn’t be doing this work.”
