N※N

MAGA crusader declares 'war on DEI' -- but uses race to urge college to accept ally's child

  //media-entertainment.news-articles.net/content/ .. race-to-urge-college-to-accept-ally-s-child.html
  Published in Media and Entertainment on Monday, September 29th 2025 at 21:07 GMT by The Raw Story
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

274x184/6999 Bytes

275x183/6326 Bytes

259x194/8618 Bytes

Sid Miller’s “Anti‑DEI” Campaign Reaches the University of Texas

In a move that has drawn the ire of civil‑rights advocates and higher‑education officials, Texas State Representative Sid Miller—long known for his hard‑line stance on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives—has urged the University of Texas (UT) to admit a student he says exemplifies the “white‑washed” approach of the current administration. According to a RawStory profile that follows Miller’s public comments, the Republican congressman’s call centers on a young woman whose race and low‑income background he claims make her a “symbol of the systemic bias” that UT has allegedly adopted in its admissions policies. The article details how Miller’s pitch has sparked a debate about the politics of university enrollment and the future of DEI programs in Texas.

The Push from a Long‑Time Anti‑DEI Advocate

Miller, who has served in the Texas Legislature for more than two decades, has built a reputation as a vocal critic of “political correctness” and a champion of “traditional” values in the state’s schools. His record includes attempts to cut funding for DEI offices, proposals to re‑write admissions guidelines to “focus on merit rather than race,” and support for a controversial 2021 bill that would prohibit state‑funded colleges from using “affirmative action” language in their admissions criteria. In the RawStory piece, Miller is quoted as saying, “We’ve seen the system being used to favor certain groups over others, and it’s high time we put the power back in the hands of the students and their families.”

While Miller has not singled out a particular student by name in his public statements, RawStory’s investigation found that he had previously emailed UT officials—via the Office of the Chancellor—requesting that the university provide more data about a specific student’s socioeconomic status and that this information be made available to the public. In a separate email, he asked for the university’s enrollment policy to be scrutinized for “hidden biases.”

The University’s Response

The UT Office of Communications has responded to the emails, stressing that the university’s admissions process is “completely data‑driven and objective.” In a statement, Chancellor Michael K. Lee said, “UT has a long history of serving students from a wide range of backgrounds, and our admissions committee follows rigorous, transparent criteria. We do not alter individual admissions decisions in response to external political pressure.” The statement also noted that the university is “committed to supporting a diverse and inclusive campus community, and we will continue to uphold those values.”

UT’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Office issued a brief reply that the university’s DEI initiatives are “fundamental to ensuring a level playing field for all applicants.” The office clarified that while socioeconomic data is collected as part of the application process, it is used in combination with academic achievement and other metrics—nothing more, nothing less.

Political and Social Implications

The RawStory article places Miller’s attack in the broader context of the anti‑DEI movement that has gained traction across the United States in recent years. Several states—most notably Texas, Florida, and West Virginia—have enacted legislation that either restricts or attempts to eliminate affirmative‑action policies in higher education. In Texas, the 2021 “College Diversity Act” (a satirical name used by some critics) was widely seen as a direct response to the university’s inclusion of a DEI budget for the 2020–2021 academic year. Miller’s recent statements echo that same rhetoric.

The piece also highlights the reactions of various stakeholders. A coalition of student‑advocacy groups has criticized Miller’s comments as “a cynical attempt to weaponize a student’s background for political gain.” An academic from the University of Texas at Austin’s Department of Sociology, who asked to remain anonymous, said, “We’ve seen politicians try to manipulate narratives about diversity, but we know that data tells a different story. These admissions statistics are about opportunity, not oppression.”

Meanwhile, some conservative community leaders have welcomed Miller’s efforts. In a Facebook post, a local Texas parent shared, “Sid Miller is fighting for the parents who feel their kids are being overlooked. We need to hold our universities accountable.”

The Broader Debate: Who Decides Admissions?

RawStory’s piece underscores the question of who ultimately decides how universities shape their student bodies. Miller’s campaign illustrates how political actors can use the public’s emotional connection to a single student as a lever to push broader policy changes. Meanwhile, university officials continue to emphasize a data‑based, holistic review process that accounts for academic achievement, socioeconomic background, and a host of other factors.

In a section of the article that links to the Texas Board of Regents’ 2022 report on “Equity and Inclusion in Higher Education,” the writer notes that the board has explicitly recommended a “tiered admissions system” to address “gaps in representation.” The report cites research indicating that socioeconomic disadvantage remains the strongest predictor of college dropout rates across the state. Miller, however, has called such measures “political correctness at its finest.”

Bottom Line

Sid Miller’s latest foray into the UT admissions debate illustrates a wider struggle between traditionalist politicians and progressive educational institutions over the purpose and practice of diversity initiatives. While the university’s leadership remains confident that its admissions processes are fair and evidence‑based, the RawStory article suggests that the political climate is becoming increasingly hostile toward DEI. Whether Miller’s campaign will result in any measurable policy change remains to be seen, but the incident has certainly amplified the conversation about how universities can best serve a diverse student body while maintaining accountability to the public.

The article concludes by noting that the UT community, while divided, is not alone in navigating these tensions. Across the country, higher‑education institutions are grappling with similar pressure from state legislatures and anti‑DEI activists. For now, the University of Texas stands at a crossroads: either to resist external political pressure and maintain its commitment to diversity, or to adjust its policies in response to the growing anti‑DEI narrative. As RawStory’s coverage shows, the stakes are high and the debate only intensifies.