To whom it may concern, We, the undersigned students and members of the Kennesaw State University community, write to express our deep concern and unified opposition to the recent “reimagining” of the resource centers, including the LGBTQ Resource Center, Cultural Awareness Resource Center (CARC), Unity Center, Global Village, Women’s Resource Center, and the HOLA Center. These changes, carried out in response to the Department of Education’s “Dear Colleagues” letter, are not simple administrative changes. They are political acts, one that strips away the visibility, safety, and validation these centers have long provided for students from historically marginalized and underrepresented communities. There is no federal or state legal requirement mandating these “reimagining” efforts. We feel it is imperative to note that this letter is a guidance document, not a binding legal mandate. It does not have the force of the law to create new legal obligations. It even explicitly states: “This guidance does not have the force and effect of law and does not bind the public or create new legal standards.” 1 We do acknowledge that the DOE letter does warn that institutions failing to comply with its interpretations may risk losing federal funding. While the letter warns that noncompliance with federal interpretations of civil rights law may place institutions at risk of losing federal funding, any enforcement action under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 would require adherence to established legal procedures, including formal investigation, findings, and opportunities for voluntary resolution. By preemptively altering or “reimagining” these centers without a legal requirement, the university is choosing to comply with perceived political pressures rather than upholding its commitment to support and protect its diverse student body. We are writing because we believe the university's current path, one of quiet dismantling under the banner of “compliance,” violates the very commitments Kennesaw State has made to its students, faculty, staff, and broader community. The decision to restructure these centers was not made in partnership with the people who rely on them. It was not requested by students. It does not reflect the needs of those most impacted. These centers have never been about exclusion. They have been lifelines. The removal or rebranding of these spaces is not simply an operational decision. It is a decision about whose needs are seen as worthy of protection, and whose are not. This letter reflects not only the voices of concerned students but also the growing coalition of faculty, alumni, community organizations, and elected officials who recognize that what is at stake here is more than programming. If Kennesaw State University wishes to uphold its stated 1 https://www.ed.gov/media/document/dear-colleague-letter-sffa-v-harvard-109506.pdf values of diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility, it cannot do so while dismantling the very infrastructures that embody those commitments. The restructuring of identity-based resource centers is a decision with real and measurable consequences for the students who have long relied on these spaces, not only for programming but for their sense of safety, affirmation, and community. These centers were not created arbitrarily. They exist because the university recognized, at least at one point, that students from marginalized backgrounds face disproportionate barriers to access, retention, and success in higher education. When institutions choose to strip names and identities from spaces explicitly built to affirm marginalized students, they are sending a clear message: Your identity is political. Your presence is a liability. These centers have never been about exclusion, they have been lifelines. As Celeste Vincent, a freshman Chemistry student, stated in a recent interview in “Kennesaw State students say anti-DEI from state and feds already sapping campus support,” 2 “Some people, it’s all they have,” she said. “They don’t have family, they don’t have friends, they don’t have the resources to reach out to people. They have this, and they want to take it away. Why? Why? Because they hate them, they hate kids, they hate the new generation. These kids paid good money to be here. They worked their asses off to graduate high school. They come here every day and they pay and they sit in their classes and they try to do their best. And the one support that we get, we’re told, you can’t have that because you’re less than. That’s what it boils down to.” Kennesaw State University proudly and repeatedly claims that it puts students first. On the university’s official Student Life webpage, KSU declares: “At Kennesaw State, we put our students first in everything we do, all 45,000+ of them — and this starts from day one... Coming to KSU will feel like coming home — a home where discovery and innovation thrive, where fond memories are made each day and where potential meets possibility.” But to claim to “put students first” while simultaneously dismantling the spaces that marginalized students have relied on for survival is not just hypocrisy, it is harm. For many LGBTQ+ students, students of color, international students, disabled students, and first-generation students, these resource centers were that home. They were where “potential met possibility.” They were where students first felt they belonged. When students arrive at KSU, they are promised a home. However, in practice, many have received instead the slow, deliberate 2 https://georgiarecorder.com/2025/04/09/kennesaw-state-students-say-anti-dei-from-state-and-feds-alread y-sapping-campus-support/ erosion of the few spaces on campus designed to support them as their full selves. These resource centers are not “extras.” They are not branding. They are survival infrastructure. They are where care happens. The university’s own Division of Student Affairs claims its mission is to: “transform the student experience by instilling a sense of belonging and preparing students for lifelong success.” 3 Yet as these resource centers are being restructured or erased, it is precisely that sense of belonging that is being stripped away from the students who most need it. Belonging cannot be built solely through generalizations or vague programming. It requires intentionality. It requires spaces where students know they will be seen, heard, and understood. The “reimagining” of these centers not only strips away that sense of belonging, but it also shows that the university is willing to sacrifice the well-being of the students who are most vulnerable to political backlash. Furthermore, we find it deeply concerning that identity-based centers such as those supporting LGBTQ+ students, students of color, and international students are being “reimagined,” yet the Military and Veteran Services and the FLIGHT program are not included in these discussions or being restructured. The Military and Veteran Services is explicitly designed to serve a “resource hub” for a distinct identity group. 4 Similarly, the FLIGHT program, which groups students by class year to provide “ innovative and transformative experiences to meet the social, personal, and academic needs of students and help them build a sense of belonging with their peers and the campus community throughout their collegiate experience, ” continues to be supported and publicly celebrated by the institution. 5 While KSU preserves FLIGHT’s identity-centered mission to foster belonging, it is simultaneously dismantling resource centers that have provided that same sense of belonging for marginalized students. The exact language used to justify FLIGHT is precisely what students have relied on in these centers for years, a safe space to connect with peers, receive support, and feel part of something larger than themselves. If the justification for these changes truly stems from a legal obligation to remove identity-centered programming to comply with federal guidelines, why does this standard not apply universally? The inconsistency shows that the university is selectively interpreting the ‘Dear Colleague’ letter and disproportionately targeting certain communities while preserving others that are deemed politically “safe.” This is not equity, it is simply erasure under the guide of vague federal compliance. Students showed up to the meetings held by Student Affairs about these changes because they care deeply about the futures of these centers. Every meeting was packed or nearly full. Students 5 https://www.kennesaw.edu/student-affairs/community/flight.php 4 https://www.kennesaw.edu/student-affairs/community/military-veteran-services/index.php 3 https://www.kennesaw.edu/student-affairs/index.php came not only to advocate for themselves but to defend the communities that these centers hold together. The university owes these students more than vague assurances. It owes them real accountability and transparent decision-making. Without clear language, intentional focus, and student-led guidance, any “reimagining” of these centers risks leaving behind the very students these spaces were created to serve. In addition to the “reimagining” of the resource centers, we are deeply concerned about the university’s response to the increasing climate of fear and instability surrounding international students in the United States. In recent months, international students across the United States have had their academic lives disrupted by the abrupt revocation of their visas by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). A federal lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia highlights the cases of over 500 international students, faculty members, and researchers whose visas have been revoked with little to no explanation. Among those affected are students from multiple institutions in Georgia, including Kennesaw State University. A KSU student-athlete had her visa revoked following an arrest related to a fight with her boyfriend, despite the case being dismissed. So many international students are facing uncertainty as they may face potential deportation without clear justification or due process. Attorney Charles Kuck, representing over 150 affected students, emphasizes that many revocations are based on minor infractions or allegations without formal charges or convictions. 6 Revoking a student’s visa without notice or opportunity for response violates fundamental principles of due process as protected under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. In response to these developments, KSU issued a vague statement: “Similar to universities across the nation, we are closely following the developments related to international students and their visas. As KSU works to follow all federal and state regulations and the policies of the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, we will continue to do everything we can to legally support our students.” 7 More troubling is that many international students discovered their visa terminations not through official notice, but through sudden SEVIS system lockouts, registration denials, or evictions from campus housing. This is not only a legal issue, but also an issue of basic dignity, safety, and educational access. KSU welcomes and celebrates F-1 students to their university, stating on their page for international students: 7 https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/atlanta/college-students-across-north-georgia-are-having-their-visas-re voked-lot-fear-right-now/D24RZXKKQJHLJCK5QRMPGYU5DU/ 6 https://www.atlantanewsfirst.com/2025/04/17/attorneys-heading-federal-court-atlanta-international-student s-whose-visas-were-revoked/ “As an international student pursuing global education at Kennesaw State, we are thrilled to provide you with a comprehensive support system to help you thrive academically, culturally, and personally.” 8 To make such promises while reimagining the Global Village, one of the few spaces designed specifically to meet these students’ needs, is a direct contradiction. Moreover, to remain silent in the face of visa revocations affecting one’s own students is not support. It is complicity. These actions, as described in the federal lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, represent significant violations of due process rights under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits the government from depriving any person of “life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” 9 The legal standard of due process requires at a minimum that individuals receive timely notice and an opportunity to be heard before adverse government action is taken against them. 10 This failure to notify also intersects directly with the protections afforded under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), 20 U.S.C. § 1232g, which grants students the right to control access to their educational records, including enrollment status and immigration-related information. Under federal regulations, disclosure of personally identifiable student information without consent is permitted only under limited exceptions, such as compliance with a judicial order or lawfully issued subpoena. 11 Even in these cases, institutions are generally required to make a reasonable effort to notify students in advance of the disclosure unless legally prohibited. 12 Sharing enrollment data, visa status, or other educational records with immigration enforcement agencies without proper notice or lawful compulsion may constitute a violation of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). Additionally, the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) requires that schools promptly update the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) regarding any changes to a student’s status. 13 However, compliance with SEVIS reporting requirements does not override constitutional due process rights or the university’s FERPA obligations. The existence of SEVIS reporting requirements does not justify failing to notify students of critical changes to their status, nor does it relieve the university of its ethical responsibility to advocate for their safety and well-being. If KSU is to maintain its integrity and legal compliance, it must provide transparent processes for informing students if their data is requested by immigration authorities and publicly disclose, through annual reports, the frequency and nature of such disclosures. 13 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, “SEVIS Policy Guidance for School Officials”. 12 34 C.F.R. § 99.31(a)(9)(ii); U.S. Department of Education, Family Policy Compliance Office (FPCO), “Disclosure of Education Records to Law Enforcement”. 11 Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974, 20 U.S.C. § 1232g(b)(2); Code of Federal Regulations, 34 C.F.R. § 99.31(a). 10 Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 333 (1976). 9 U.S. Constitution, amend. V. 8 https://www.kennesaw.edu/global-education/international-student-scholar-services/f-1/index.php Silence and ambiguity only deepen the harm already inflicted on students whose presence and participation on this campus have been targeted by federal overreach. The message sent to every international student on this campus is clear: your presence here is precarious. Your future here is uncertain. This reality has been highlighted by civil rights organizations across Georgia and nationwide. As Javeria Jamil, Legal Director of CAIR-Georgia stated: “It’s clear that the crackdown and visa revocations of international students are politically motivated and target Black, Brown, Muslim and other students of color, who the Trump Administration finds undesirable. The Department of Homeland Security should immediately reverse these illegal status terminations, and university officials, Georgia elected officials, and all Georgians, should stand firmly with international students who are being targeted.” 14 Jennifer Lee, Policy Director of Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Atlanta, similarly emphasized: “International students have long made vital contributions to Georgia, and these attacks hurt both the intellectual and economic impact of our colleges and universities.” 15 These statements reflect what many students at KSU already know: the university cannot rely on silence and procedural distance to excuse inaction. As long as international students are left without clear information, legal resources, or institutional advocacy, the university’s commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion remain inadequate! We are also deeply upset by the university’s recent decision to discontinue the Black Studies major and the Philosophy major. While the stated rationale centers on enrollment numbers, we believe this reasoning profoundly undervalues the purpose and contribution of these disciplines to the intellectual life of this university. Black Studies and Philosophy are not simply degree options; they are critical fields of study that foster analytical thinking, ethical reasoning, and historical awareness. These are programs that challenge students to engage with complex systems of power, justice, and human experience, tools that are essential not only for academic success but for civic participation and leadership in an increasingly interconnected world. It is not lost on us that this is not the first time the university has targeted the Black Studies program to be cut. In 2017, a similar attempt was made to cut Black Studies, citing the same justifications. That decision was met with immediate and significant resistance from students, faculty, and community members, who organized protests and demanded accountability. The fact that this program is once again under attack, nearly a decade later, shows a concerning pattern of 15 https://www.advancingjustice-atlanta.org/news/condemnrevocationvisas 14 https://www.advancingjustice-atlanta.org/news/condemnrevocationvisas devaluing the meaning of these studies and labor of the faculty and staff who have built these programs. These majors were not created at random. They were developed through the dedicated work of faculty and staff who have consistently invested in mentoring students, building curriculum, and contributing meaningfully to building spaces where students can question, learn, and grow. To cut these programs is not merely to reduce course offerings, it is to remove access to precisely the kinds of questions and knowledge traditions that make higher education valuable. It is to send a message about which histories, which philosophies, and which student needs are viewed as expendable. We raise this issue here because these program eliminations are not isolated decisions. They reflect the same troubling pattern we see in the restructuring of identity-based resource centers and the absence of a clear institutional response to the visa revocations targeting international students. Taken together, these actions undermine the university’s stated commitments to diversity, equity, inclusion, accessibility, and academic excellence. We urge the administration to reconsider these program cuts and to engage in transparent dialogue with students, faculty, and staff about the future of these majors. If Kennesaw State University is serious about its mission to foster critical thinking, global understanding, and ethical leadership, then it must protect the academic spaces where that work takes place. Through its public statements and news articles, KSU has consistently presented itself as a place where inclusion, belonging, and student success are key to its mission. These values are not just promotional language; they are promises made to students, parents, faculty, staff, and the community. In fact, KSU has even been recognized for these values. The SPCEET at KSU earned national recognition for diversity efforts in 2022 and stated: “Our college has made significant strides in its commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion and has increased our numbers of underrepresented students, faculty and staff...I look forward to seeing these efforts be embraced by our community and what consequential changes we will continue to make to ensure DEI is woven in our teaching, research and service.” 16 Yet, while the university boasts of “consequential changes” and a commitment to integrating DEI into teaching, research, and service, it is actively dismantling the infrastructure that makes those commitments a reality. Enrollment numbers alone do not reflect equity. Hiring statements do not reflect inclusion. Equity is not achieved through presence, it is achieved through protection, care, and sustained investment in the well-being of those the university claims to welcome. To increase the number of underrepresented students and then dismantle the very supports designed for their success is not DEI work. It is harm. It is statistical tokenism, where bodies are counted but needs are unmet. And to call this progress, while gutting the programs that foster retention, 16 https://www.kennesaw.edu/news/stories/2022/spceet-earns-national-recognition-for-diversity-efforts.php community, and belonging, is not consequential change, it is calculated erasure. Even more troubling, Interim President Ken Harmon once stated: “There are certain foundations and fundamentals that bring us together as a community, ideas like freedom of speech and a respect for differences... Kennesaw State remains a place that fosters all perspectives, across backgrounds, beliefs, cultures and abilities.” 17 And the university’s most recent strategic plan highlights as a pillar of its Roadmap to R2 Success: “Advancing community and culture” This pillar has specific commitments to fostering a sense of belonging and supporting a diverse marketplace of ideas. These are powerful statements. But they cannot remain words on a webpage while the university’s actions tell a different story. When the university restructures the resource centers that marginalized students depend on, it does not foster belonging, it fosters displacement. When the programs that interrogate systems of injustice, such as Black Studies and Philosophy, are cut, the so-called “marketplace of ideas” narrows. When international students face visa revocations without institutional advocacy, the promise of support and inclusion collapses under political convenience. These contradictions are not minor inconsistencies. They are profound failures of accountability. The words KSU uses to define its values, to recruit students, to market itself as an inclusive home, are being weaponized as cover for actions that directly betray those values. If these words are to mean anything, the university must align its policies and decisions with its promises. Students who come to KSU believing in these commitments, who take seriously the language of “home” and “putting students first,” deserve more than recruitment slogans. They deserve the material support and infrastructures that make those commitments real. The dismantling of identity-based resource centers and academic programs that hold space for critical thought is not aligned with KSU’s stated values. It is a decision that erases the very communities and conversations that allow these values to exist beyond marketing. These contradictions are especially hypocritical when the university continues to promote its national recognition for “inclusive excellence.” Across press releases, award ceremonies, and national rankings, the university has positioned itself as a leader in DEI work, celebrating Presidential Diversity Awards, HEED recognitions, and accolades for “inclusive excellence.” These awards appear on marketing materials and university webpages. They are cited as proof that KSU fosters a campus where all students belong. While the university has eagerly accepted these accolades, using them to enhance its reputation, recruitment, and donor relations, it has 17 https://www.kennesaw.edu/news/stories/2018/presidential_diversity_awards_2018.php#:~:text=Seven%2 0members%20of%20Kennesaw%20State,Office%20of%20Diversity%20and%20Inclusion simultaneously chosen to dismantle the very programs that make such recognition meaningful. The resource centers now being “reimagined” are the same infrastructures that the university has pointed to when highlighting its DEI achievements. These are the programs that have helped KSU claim the language of equity. Their existence has been central to the university’s ability to position itself as a national leader in inclusion. And yet, those very spaces are now on the chopping block. There is a major difference between earning recognition through sustained action and collecting recognition as a performance. Awards that celebrate “inclusive excellence” mean nothing if the institution treats inclusion as expendable the moment it becomes politically inconvenient. The decision to restructure or erase identity-based support systems while continuing to market the university as a DEI leader is not simply a contradiction, it is exploitation. It is the use of marginalized students’ labor, stories, and presence as branding material, all while abandoning the programs that allow those students to thrive. This is not a misunderstanding. It is not a failure of optics. It is a deliberate choice to prioritize the appearance of equity over the reality of it. If the university believes in the commitments that its awards represent, then those commitments must show up in policy and practice, not just in acceptance speeches and web headlines. Otherwise, these recognitions are not honors. They are shields. They are used to deflect criticism while harm is carried out behind the language of progress. KSU cannot have it both ways. It cannot claim the prestige of DEI leadership while turning its back on the very students whose experiences make that leadership possible. This month, faculty senates from Big Ten universities, including Rutgers, Indiana University, Michigan, Purdue, Ohio State, Northwestern, and others, announced a mutual academic defense compact, a national alliance committed to collectively resisting political interference in academic freedom, research, and diversity initiatives. 18 This alliance aims to share legal and financial resources to protect against actions like research funding cuts, visa revocations for international students, and directives on curricular content. In addition to this compact, hundreds of college presidents and officials signed a letter protesting the “unprecedented government overreach and political interference” under the Trump administration. 19 This letter, released by the American Association of Colleges and Universities, emphasizes the essential freedom of institutions to determine admissions and curricula without undue government intrusion. Kennesaw State University was not on either of these lists. Not a single signature. Not a single word of public support for the students and faculty most impacted. 19 https://www.pbs.org/newshour/education/read-the-full-letter-from-universities-opposing-government-intrusi on 18 https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2025/04/24/big-10-universities-alliance-trump-attacks/ This absence is telling. It signals to students, staff, faculty, and the community that KSU is willing to remain silent as academic freedom comes under assault and as the lives of marginalized students are thrown into precarity. We are a campus that has watched our international students have their visas revoked without due process. We are watching as our resource centers are gutted, as Black Studies and Philosophy face cuts, as political interference replaces academic governance. And yet while hundreds of faculty across the country stand up to say "this is unacceptable," KSU’s leadership has chosen not to act. If KSU truly believes in its stated mission to foster "a community that provides a sense of belonging and a broad marketplace of ideas," then it must stand alongside the institutions that are actively defending those principles. Remaining on the sidelines is not an option. It is a choice to abandon the very values the university claims to uphold. In the face of these ongoing attacks, on our resource centers, on our academic programs, on international students, and on the core principles of academic freedom, we refuse to be silent. Students did not request these institutional changes being implemented. They do not reflect community needs. And they are not required by law. While we recognize the external pressures KSU may be facing, we reject the idea that student input is optional. The following demands reflect the collective voices of Kennesaw State students, faculty, alumni, and community partners, and are grounded both in federal law and in the values the university claims to uphold. These are not demands for special treatment, they are for accountability, transparency, and the protection of students. 1. Reverse the Restructuring of the Resource Center a. Immediately reinstate the LGBTQ Resource Center, Cultural Awareness Resource Center (CARC), Unity Center, Global Village, Women’s Resource Center, and the HOLA Center with their original names, distinct missions, dedicated staff, and physical spaces b. Publicly affirm that identity-based programming is not illegal: The Dear Colleague letter itself says, “This guidance does not have the force and effect of law and does not bind the public or create new legal standards.” We demand that the university release a statement acknowledging this and correcting the false narrative that such changes were legally required. c. Reject all attempts to consolidate, rebrand, or erase these centers under generic programming that strips them of their purpose and history d. Continue communication and engagement with students over the summer and beyond, ensuring that major decisions are not made without student input while most are away from campus. 2. Legal and Ethical Compliance a. Host a public, student-facing legal information session with the university’s General Counsel to explain what the Dear Colleague letter does and does not require, and how KSU is interpreting it. Students deserve transparency. b. Develop and implement legally informed training for administrators and faculty on Title VI/IX compliance, clarifying what federal civil rights law permits and does not permit. This should include explicit clarification that identity-based support is not discriminatory when access is open and mission-driven. c. Create a Legal Transparency Dashboard that tracks OCR inquiries, compliance reviews, and university interpretations of federal guidance, ensuring students are not being misled by speculative “risk avoidance.” d. Provide a clear and publicly accessible timeline of all past and future changes related to resource centers, academic programs, and federal compliance decisions. 3. Equity in Program Funding and Structural Support a. Conduct a campus-wide audit of all identity-based programs including those not restructured, through an equity lens: We demand consistency. If the university claims legal compliance, it must apply it across all identity programs, FLIGHT, Veterans Resource Center, and others. This audit must include community feedback and public reporting. b. Allocate funding for resource center programming proportional to enrollment and need, not political palatability. The Dear Colleague letter does not prohibit funding equity, nor does it endorse the defunding of communities deemed politically “controversial.” c. Provide full transparency over how funds are allocated to ALL resource centers and student support programs. 4. Protections for International Students a. Issue a formal university statement affirming protections for international students, especially those affected by retaliatory immigration enforcement. b. Publicly disclose any data-sharing practices or communications between KSU and federal agencies, including ICE, DHS, and SEVP, particularly regarding student visa statuses. c. Conduct a formal review of KSU’s FERPA compliance and ensure that student immigration data is not shared without proper legal compulsion or student consent. d. Affirm the right of international students to participate in campus organizing, activism, and protest without fear of surveillance or penalization 5. Restoration and Protection of Academic Freedom and Program Integrity a. Reverse the elimination of Black Studies and Philosophy majors and commit to sustained investment in these programs b. Engage in transparent communication with students, faculty, and community stakeholders regarding the future of these programs c. Affirm KSU’s commitment to the intellectual value of these disciplines, recognizing their role in fulfilling the university’s stated mission and strategic goals. 6. Take a Public Stand against Political Pressures a. Issue a public statement affirming KSU’s support for identity-based support structures, international students, and the academic freedom necessary for student success b. Publicly endorse and participate in the national Mutual Academic Defense Compact alongside peer institutions. c. Sign the AAC&U national letter condemning federal attacks on DEI programs, international students, and academic freedom. d. Publicly commit that no future changes to student support infrastructure will be made without student-led consultation If Kennesaw State University truly believes in the values it so often proclaims, then now is the time to prove it.