“The road to hell is paved with good intentions” is a familiar phrase with two interpretations: actions can lead to unforeseen harm, and good intentions are worthless without proper execution. It is not a phrase that I would typically associate with diversity-related initiatives in higher education. However, recent financial and political pressures have highlighted the phrase’s unfortunate relevance to institutional diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies. Cornell University, which has long been a champion of diversity in higher education, offers a look into how quickly DEI commitments can unravel.
Cornell adopted six core values in 2019: 1) purposeful discovery, 2) free and open inquiry and expression, 3) a community of belonging, 4) exploration across boundaries, 5) changing lives through public engagement, and 6) respect for the natural environment. These guiding principles were established to lay the foundation for a more equitable and inclusive atmosphere at all Cornell campuses, in line with the institution’s founding principle to enroll students from all backgrounds (“any person . . . any study”). Weill Cornell championed these values by establishing the Office of Student Diversity, appointing the first senior associate dean for diversity and inclusion, and celebrating the first Diversity Week under the direction of Dean Augustine Choi during his six-year tenure (2016–2022). Dean Choi and Dean Barbara Hempstead also saw the development and expansion of research initiatives to promote diversity in science, including the NIGMS-funded Weill Cornell Initiative for Maximizing Student Development (IMSD) T32 leadership program. In parallel to institution-led diversity and inclusion initiatives, student-run organizations, such as the Tri-Institutional Minority Society (TIMS), fostered a sense of community and belonging amongst students from underrepresented backgrounds.
When I was going through the graduate school application process in 2018, I was pleasantly surprised to learn about all these diversity initiatives. I was drawn to the newly established IMSD program, which I found to be a helpful continuation of the professional training I received while participating in similar undergraduate research fellowships. Being an IMSD trainee allowed me to get a head start on lab rotations and gave me access to mentorship from the program’s directors and funding to help cover enrollment expenses. As a first-generation scientist, I have been able to rely on the IMSD program to help navigate challenging situations and feel supported during my time at Weill Cornell.
As we all experienced, 2020 was a pivotal year in the United States. While adjusting our lives to the COVID-19 pandemic, we also witnessed waves of protest against police brutality and injustice. Cornell University President Martha Pollack openly condemned the publicized police killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmaud Arbery through a series of statements sent to institutional emails.
“I want to make clear, both personally and on behalf of Cornell, that we will do all we can as a university to address this scourge of racism. We will address it directly in our educational programs, in our research and in our engagement and related activities, working through the ways we know best to push for a world that is equitable . . . ” — President Martha Pollack, From Statement on the Recent Killings of Black People in America
Recognizing the need to address systemic racism in academia after major Black Lives Matter protests, Weill Cornell commissioned the Social Justice and Anti-racism Task Force (SJAR). But financial pressures exacerbated cracks in the implementation of diversity and inclusion initiatives. The negative impact of COVID-related social distancing was evident. At a time when all classes were virtual and student-led organizations were expected to operate under strict health guidelines, Weill Cornell’s once-vibrant student life was dimmed and isolated. After COVID restrictions were lifted, I began to participate in student-led diversity organizations, but quickly noticed the lower number of participants at meetings and events. This decline in participation coincided with reduced institutional financial support for student-driven diversity initiatives.
Right after the first wave of budget cuts due to COVID, we were faced with the looming Supreme Court decision on race-conscious affirmative action admissions policies. This was a key decision that would not only impact the makeup of incoming classes, but could also create legal and political vulnerabilities for all diversity-related offices and initiatives. To address concerns, the Office of Student Diversity and SJAR co-hosted a two-part session discussing the future of affirmative action during the 2023 Diversity Week. I participated as a student representative on the panel for the second session, which sought to brainstorm actions the institution could take to support underrepresented individuals. Throughout the session, I heard my own fears reflected in the concerns of my peers and faculty. This feeling was magnified when I realized that the room was filled with the same familiar faces that have always worked to defend diversity initiatives, and not the people with the authority to directly implement them.
“As always, Cornell will follow the law, but within its scope we will remain a welcoming community, with strong core values and an unwavering adherence to our historic founding principle: to be a university where ‘any person can find instruction in any study.’” — President Martha Pollack, from “Supreme Court Decision on Consideration of Race in College Admissions” Statement
Once the Supreme Court decision banning race-based affirmative action in university admissions was issued, it became clear that the DEI actions Cornell had boasted about were entering a new chapter. President Pollack expressed frustration and disappointment with the ruling but concluded her statement on the decision by saying that Cornell would follow the law. Though the competitive nature of admissions makes it impossible to truly fulfill the founding principle of “any person . . . any study,” Cornell University notably enrolled lower percentages of Black and Hispanic undergraduate students following the overturning of affirmative action.
Beyond changes to admissions made to fall in line with the Supreme Court decision, graduate students at Weill Cornell were also facing reductions in funding pools aimed at promoting diversity in STEM. As of April 2024, the Ruth L. Kirschstein NRSA Predoctoral Fellowship to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research (F31-Diversity) was no longer accepting applications. The Trump Administration’s attacks on DEI in higher education and science funding led to even more cuts. In April 2025, we were informed that the IMSD program had lost its funding despite having its five-year grant reapproved in 2024. These financial pressures came alongside the Trump Administration’s decision to freeze over $1 billion of Cornell’s funding and its demand that the university dissolve any remaining “racial preferences” and other race-conscious policies.
To further comply with anti-DEI executive orders, we observed changes in terminology in both grant applications and administrative titles. Weill Cornell’s Office of Institutional Equity was restructured as the Cornell Office of Civil Rights (COCR). As of August 2025, the Office of Student Diversity was renamed to the Office of Access, Belonging and Student Success. While the initiatives and support that the Office of Student Diversity provided continue, the name change is a glaring reflection of a common experience among underrepresented groups: changing aspects of oneself to be more “acceptable.”
In November 2025, Cornell’s current president, Michael Kotlikoff, announced that Cornell University had reached a $30 million settlement with the Trump administration to reinstate federal funding. In addition, the University agreed to submit anonymized undergraduate admissions data, begin collecting data on the social climate on campus, and bar the use of race in hiring, admissions practices, and scholarship programs. President Kotlikoff’s accompanying statement highlighted the reinstatement of needed funding for research and the fact that Cornell had not been subjected to restrictions on course offerings. (When faced with a similar situation, Columbia University agreed to have a senior vice provost conduct reviews of several programs, including the Middle Eastern, South Asian, and African Studies.) However, Education Secretary Linda McMahon celebrated the decision to settle as an end to “divisive DEI policies.”
“The Trump Administration has secured another transformative commitment from an Ivy League institution to end divisive DEI policies. Thanks to this deal with Cornell and the ongoing work of DOJ [Department of Justice], HHS [Department of Health and Human Services], and the team at ED [Department of Education], U.S. universities are refocusing their attention on merit, rigor, and truth-seeking – not ideology. These reforms are a huge win in the fight to restore excellence to American higher education and make our schools the greatest in the world.” — Education Secretary Linda McMahon statement on X.com
Though funding has been returned and we continue to seek “normalcy” in the post-COVID world, it is hard to truly celebrate or trust an institution’s core values when there is a mounting pile of evidence that good intentions might not lead to permanent improvements in inclusivity. It is time for Cornell’s administration to deeply reflect on their established core principles—or change them to better reflect the university’s actions. If academic institutions continue to change language and policies in response to political pressure, they undermine the principles they have long pledged to support.