As the U.S. presidential election looms, concerns over a potential Trump 2.0 presidency are growing, especially in the context of equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI). These issues were the focus of a recent event, “Trump’s America and the Future of Diversity,” hosted by Verity Firth, Vice-President for Societal Impact, Equity, and Engagement at the University of New South Wales (UNSW). The panel featured prominent voices: former BBC foreign affairs correspondent Nick Bryant, UC Law San Francisco’s Chief Diversity Officer Mario Lopez, and Frances Voon, Executive Manager of the Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law.
The panelists discussed the importance of diversity in higher education in both Australia and the United States, and explored how the future of EDI efforts might evolve under a second Trump presidency.
Verity Firth opened the conversation by asking the panelists about the likelihood of Trump’s return to office and its potential impact on polls. Mario Lopez responded by stating the chances are “50-50,” with the outcome hanging in the balance of six key states. He highlighted the disproportionate influence of a small number of voters, mentioning that out of nearly 330 million Americans, less than a million people in these swing states may decide the election.
Nick Bryant expressed concern over Trump’s growing global influence, referring to it as the “Trump contagion.” He remarked, “it frightens me, the Trump effect,” sharing that he had seen Australians waving Trump flags. While he believes there is an anti-Trump majority in the U.S., Bryant noted that the distribution of voters makes it difficult to turn that into a decisive electoral outcome.
Verity Firth then turned the conversation to Frances Voon, asking about the global geopolitical implications of a Trump victory. Voon warned of a return to the controversial policies of Trump’s first term, including the expansion of the Muslim travel ban and the implementation of the largest domestic deportation operation in U.S. history. She highlighted how Trump had drastically reduced refugee resettlement, a policy shift that could have profound effects amid record-high global displacement. Voon also expressed concern that Trump might withdraw the U.S. from key international institutions such as the UN Human Rights Council, potentially leading to a rise in human rights abuses.
Shifting focus to Trump’s impact on foreign relations, Verity Firth noted that Trump has overturned conventional U.S. positions on global alliances, despite the U.S. military-industrial complex’s opposition to figures like Vladimir Putin or regimes such as North Korea. She then asked Mario Lopez about the implications for the same, to which Lopez responded that the U.S. would likely strive to maintain diplomatic ties. However, he added that the biggest question is “whether we remain in NATO or not.” Lopez warned that if the U.S. withdraws, the consequences could be particularly tragic for Ukraine.
The discussion shifted toward Trump’s use of racially charged language, and Firth asked the panelists how this rhetoric is shaping public opinion and impacting his supporters. Frances Voon pointed to data showing an increase in racial prejudice during Trump’s presidency, stating that Trump’s rhetoric emboldens people to express dehumanizing racial tropes that were once socially unacceptable.
Nick Bryant built on this, explaining that while Trump’s use of racial language is alarming, it is not surprising given his history. He highlighted the stark contrast between Trump’s presidency and that of Barack Obama, who symbolized progress on issues related to race and LGBTQ+ rights. Bryant argued that Trump has weaponized racism as part of his core political strategy, citing a recent debate where Trump made absurd claims about immigrants eating dogs and cats. “Trump knows that using racism works,” Bryant said, noting that historically, racial politics have been effective for Republicans.
Turning to Mario Lopez, Firth asked what actions can be taken in the present, especially within universities, to combat the challenges of racism and discrimination. Lopez highlighted the significance of events like Diversity Week as evidence of ongoing efforts to move forward. He expressed optimism, noting that social media has made it easier to communicate and shine a global spotlight on issues of discrimination, emphasizing the interconnectedness of the world and the collective fight for change.
In terms of the role universities can play, Lopez stressed that institutions of higher education have the resources and research capabilities to address complex world problems. He noted that universities provide opportunities for leadership and entrepreneurship, which can drive meaningful change in society. Despite setbacks, Lopez remained hopeful, agreeing with the panel that progress often follows the pattern of “two steps forward, one step back,” but that it still represents forward momentum.
Firth then turned the discussion to a recent landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling that restricts the consideration of race in admissions at Harvard and the University of North Carolina. Mario Lopez described the ruling as a “tale of two states,” noting that while some states had already implemented similar bans, others have seen a decline in diversity since this law was passed, negatively affecting institutions that once benefited from diversity programs.
Lopez explained that the Supreme Court ruling narrowly focused on race in admissions, clarifying in its footnotes that the “pursuit of diversity programs was very much lawful.” However, the threat of litigation has led many universities to scrap these programs out of fear.
Frances Voon also pointed out that while the ruling limits race-based admissions, universities are still allowed to consider applicants’ lived experiences, including racial experiences, as part of their application process.
Nick Bryant weighed in on this loophole, remarking that allowing the lived experience of race to be included in essays could be seen as a workaround to the ruling. He criticized the decision of supreme court, suggesting that it was “premised on the idea that racism doesn’t exist anymore.” Bryant noted that this narrative has been used historically to dismiss or downplay the ongoing challenges faced by marginalized groups.
The panel discussed the complex and often fraught nature of diversity and inclusion in both the U.S. and Australia. With the potential return of Trump to the White House, concerns over racial discrimination, the dismantling of diversity programs, and geopolitical instability are at the forefront of public discourse. Yet, the panelists shared a cautious optimism that, despite challenges, progress continues and that universities, alongside broader societal efforts, can play a pivotal role in shaping a more inclusive future.