Boards in the Balance: Governing Higher Education Amid Anti-DEI Policy

This study explored how public higher education governing boards interpret and respond to anti–diversity, equity, and inclusion (anti-DEI) legislation. Drawing on frameworks of interest convergence/divergence and public accountability, we conducted a critical discourse analysis of governing board meetings across six states where anti-DEI policies have been adopted. We found that board discourse is characterized by a rhetoric of minimization and deflection, which frames DEI restrictions as administratively manageable and ideologically neutral. Boards rarely acknowledge the implications of these policies for marginalized communities, instead emphasizing compliance, institutional resilience, and reputational risk management. These findings reveal how governing boards serve as political actors—strategically shaping institutional responses in ways that reinforce dominant state ideologies and marginalize equity-oriented commitments. This study contributes to the literature on public governance and DEI by positioning governing boards as central agents in the discursive construction of diversity policy in an era of growing political polarization.