Dive Brief:
- Two Democratic leaders in the Virginia Legislature are questioning the legality of the University of Virginia's recent deal with the U.S. Department of Justice and calling for an independent review of its constitutionality.
- In an eight-page letter this week, state Sens. Scott Surovell and L. Louise Lucas said the agreement “directly conflicts with state law, commits the University to eliminate legislatively mandated programs, subjects the University President to personal certification requirements and potentially places UVA in violation of its statutory obligations."
- The pair requested UVA Interim President Paul Mahoney and Rachel Sheridan, the head of UVA's board, to formally respond by Nov. 7. UVA did not immediately respond to questions Thursday.
Dive Insight:
On Oct. 22, Mahoney signed a four-page agreement with the DOJ to eventually close five investigations into UVA. In exchange, the public university agreed to adhere to the DOJ's sweeping July guidance against diversity, equity and inclusion efforts and provide the agency with quarterly compliance reports.
In their letter, Surovell and Lucas lambasted Mahoney and Sheridan for "a fundamental breach of the governance relationship" between the university and the state.
"This agreement was disturbingly executed with zero consultation with the General Assembly, despite the fact that the General Assembly controls the University and provides the bulk of its government funding," they said, arguing the lack of legislative involvement could violate state statute.
When announcing the deal, UVA said Mahoney struck the deal with input from the university’s governing board, whose members were "kept apprised of the negotiations and briefed on the final terms before signature." Since the agreement doesn’t include a financial penalty, it did not require a formal vote from the board, the university said in an FAQ.
Along with the board, Mahoney has said he struck the deal with input from the university’s leadership and internal and external legal counsel.
Surovell and Lucas questioned if Jason Miyares, Virginia's Republican Attorney General and an ally of President Donald Trump, had counseled the university about the deal.
Miyares — who fired UVA's longtime legal counsel upon taking office in 2022 — is up for reelection in November with Trump's endorsement, a backing Lucas and Surovell cast as an "inherent conflict of interest.”
It is unclear, they said, if Virginia's top lawyer is “competent and capable of providing truly independent legal advice to Virginia’s public universities in this area of the law."
Virginia public colleges “need legal counsel who will zealously defend state sovereignty and institutional autonomy — not counsel whose political fortunes are tied to the very administration applying the pressure," they said.
The two lawmakers, along with Democratic state Sen. Mamie Locke, previously threatened UVA's state funding if the university agreed to the Trump administration’s separate higher education compact, which offered preferential access to grant funding in exchange for unprecedented federal oversight. UVA turned it down five days before announcing its deal with the DOJ.
Lucas and Surovell aren't the only Virginia legislators to question the integrity of the UVA-DOJ deal. State Del. Katrina Callsen and Sen. R. Creigh Deeds, Democrats who represent UVA's district, condemned it as subjecting the university "to unprecedented federal control."
In an Oct. 23 letter, the pair told Mahoney and the board that their approval of the agreement calls "into grave question your ability to adequately protect the interests and resources entrusted to you by the Virginia General Assembly."
"Your actions fail to leave the University free and unafraid to combat that which is untrue or in error," they said. "By agreeing to these terms, UVA risks betraying the very principles you espouse in your letter: academic freedom, ideological diversity, and free expression."
Callsen and Deeds called on UVA leadership to reverse the deal and "reject further federal interference."
When asked on Thursday if Mahoney or the board had responded, Deed's office referred to a story published by The Cavalier Daily, the university's independent student newspaper.
In a letter shared with The Daily, Mahoney and Sheridan said that they "respectfully disagree" with Deeds and Callsen's assessment, adding that the deal is the "culmination of months of engagement" with the DOJ and other federal agencies over multiple civil rights investigations.
They also said the institution's deal with the federal government differs significantly from the "lengthy lists of specific obligations" agreed to by Columbia and Brown universities.
"Our agreement is different — if the United States believes we are not in compliance, its only remedy is to terminate the agreement," they said.
