UVA: Spanberger tells BOV to put presidential search on hold, Ryan issues letter laying out BOV/DOJ malfeasance

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lol halt search until we install a qualified, intelligent human being.

FIFY

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol halt search until we install a lefty liberal.

As an alum, a parent, a supporter, and a "lefty liberal" that's NOT what we are saying at all.

Mcalfeasance and collusion between our government and higher education - that you should have an opinion of and it scares me to think you don't care about that!

Um

- how is Spanberger inserting herself into the process (and essentially demanding a different UVA president), anything other than: “Malfeasance and collusion between our [Commonwealth] government and higher education” ??

Please explain.

Because it's literally part of her job. She appoints BOV members (Approved by VA legislature) who select the President. Just like Youngkin did, she wants to make sure the BOV is comprised of people she and the legislature would have in place to make this decision.

You know - like how Mitch McConnell wouldn't confirm Supreme Court Justices at the end of the Obama administration?

Is she the governor?

[Anonymous]

Wow, that letter. Someone on this board must know Rachel Sheridan and Porter Wilkison—are these two as awful as they’re made out to be?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can she rehire Ryan?

This alum would live to see that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The situation at the University of Virginia is a clear example of how DEI policies have entered a new legal and political environment. UVA’s governing board shut down the university’s DEI office earlier this year after federal investigators questioned whether some of its past programs gave advantages based on race or other protected characteristics. The Department of Justice signaled that the university was at real risk of losing federal funding if it did not fully bring its policies in line with civil rights law. Under that pressure, President James Ryan chose to resign rather than drag the institution into a long fight with the federal government.

This was not simply a clash of politics. It was the result of a legal landscape that changed after the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling on race conscious admissions. Since then, federal agencies have scrutinized any DEI program that might involve quota systems or zero sum benefits tied to race or sex. UVA’s leadership had already started dismantling its DEI structure, but critics argued the changes were cosmetic. That disagreement created a credibility problem with federal regulators, which is ultimately what forced the crisis.

Anyone coming into office now needs to understand that this environment has not shifted back. If the new governor tries to push the same style of DEI programs that brought scrutiny to UVA, she risks repeating the same cycle. The issue is not whether diversity or inclusion can be supported. Those goals are legal and widely accepted. The problem is that certain DEI models rely on decision making that treats protected characteristics as factors in hiring, admissions, or funding. That is exactly what federal investigators are now targeting.

Unless future state policies focus strictly on equal opportunity approaches that avoid these legal pitfalls, the governor could walk straight into the same trap UVA just fell into.

Someone didn’t read the letter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol halt search until we install a lefty liberal.

As an alum, a parent, a supporter, and a "lefty liberal" that's NOT what we are saying at all.

Mcalfeasance and collusion between our government and higher education - that you should have an opinion of and it scares me to think you don't care about that!

Um

- how is Spanberger inserting herself into the process (and essentially demanding a different UVA president), anything other than: “Malfeasance and collusion between our [Commonwealth] government and higher education” ??

Please explain.

Because it's literally part of her job. She appoints BOV members (Approved by VA legislature) who select the President. Just like Youngkin did, she wants to make sure the BOV is comprised of people she and the legislature would have in place to make this decision.

You know - like how Mitch McConnell wouldn't confirm Supreme Court Justices at the end of the Obama administration?

Is she the governor?

No, not yet.

But her statement reveals her obvious plan to install one of her rich campaign donors as the next UVA president, rather than letting UVA conduct a thorough, transparent search process for someone competent to lead UVA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol halt search until we install a lefty liberal.

As an alum, a parent, a supporter, and a "lefty liberal" that's NOT what we are saying at all.

Mcalfeasance and collusion between our government and higher education - that you should have an opinion of and it scares me to think you don't care about that!

Um

- how is Spanberger inserting herself into the process (and essentially demanding a different UVA president), anything other than: “Malfeasance and collusion between our [Commonwealth] government and higher education” ??

Please explain.

Because it's literally part of her job. She appoints BOV members (Approved by VA legislature) who select the President. Just like Youngkin did, she wants to make sure the BOV is comprised of people she and the legislature would have in place to make this decision.

You know - like how Mitch McConnell wouldn't confirm Supreme Court Justices at the end of the Obama administration?

Is she the governor?

No, not yet.

But her statement reveals her obvious plan to install one of her rich campaign donors as the next UVA president, rather than letting UVA conduct a thorough, transparent search process for someone competent to lead UVA.

As ever, every accusation is an admission. Installing a Trump-y toady through a shadowy, statutorily questionable process is what the BOV and Youngkin thought they could make happen. Spanberger—of whom I’m not even a huge fan!—is putting a stop to that and ensuring a duly constituted BOV conducts the process openly, transparently, and legally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can she rehire Ryan?

This alum would love to see that.

Yes but he was planning on leaving within the year or so anyway. He was just planning to leave on his own terms.

I don't think he'd want to come back - at this point. But he will certainly have large shoes to fill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Didn't UVA violate federal discrimination law because of DEI? What is the point of this, more wasted money to show they are fighting Trump, despite the entire state and country agreeing that DEI is discriminatory?

Yes, absolutely UVA policies violated federal law, including the Civil Rights Act.

This fact cannot be challenged. Ryan resigned due to his desire to continue violating federal law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol halt search until we install a lefty liberal.

As an alum, a parent, a supporter, and a "lefty liberal" that's NOT what we are saying at all.

Mcalfeasance and collusion between our government and higher education - that you should have an opinion of and it scares me to think you don't care about that!

Um

- how is Spanberger inserting herself into the process (and essentially demanding a different UVA president), anything other than: “Malfeasance and collusion between our [Commonwealth] government and higher education” ??

Please explain.

Because it's literally part of her job. She appoints BOV members (Approved by VA legislature) who select the President. Just like Youngkin did, she wants to make sure the BOV is comprised of people she and the legislature would have in place to make this decision.

You know - like how Mitch McConnell wouldn't confirm Supreme Court Justices at the end of the Obama administration?

Is she the governor?

No, not yet.

But her statement reveals her obvious plan to install one of her rich campaign donors as the next UVA president, rather than letting UVA conduct a thorough, transparent search process for someone competent to lead UVA.

As ever, every accusation is an admission. Installing a Trump-y toady through a shadowy, statutorily questionable process is what the BOV and Youngkin thought they could make happen. Spanberger—of whom I’m not even a huge fan!—is putting a stop to that and ensuring a duly constituted BOV conducts the process openly, transparently, and legally.

Exactely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can she rehire Ryan?

This alum would love to see that.

Yes but he was planning on leaving within the year or so anyway. He was just planning to leave on his own terms.

I don't think he'd want to come back - at this point. But he will certainly have large shoes to fill.

I know. I certainly wouldn’t want to go back if I were him. I think he was good guy, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn't UVA violate federal discrimination law because of DEI? What is the point of this, more wasted money to show they are fighting Trump, despite the entire state and country agreeing that DEI is discriminatory?

Yes, absolutely UVA policies violated federal law, including the Civil Rights Act.

This fact cannot be challenged. Ryan resigned due to his desire to continue violating federal law.

This is a lie. Straight up. However you feel about “DEI,” you don’t get to make stuff up.

Again, I implore people to read Ryan’s letter, where he discusses what happened in detail. Not only was he (I think too) responsive to the federal and BOV overreach re: DEI, he also wanted to respond to the different DOJ demands as the university addressed the DOJ’s concerns but was told he could not by the BOV. Then the DOJ accused the university of stonewalling and being non-responsive.

The fix was in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can she rehire Ryan?

This alum would live to see that.

This father of an alum would like to see that too.

He was such a decent and engaged man. Popular. I once e-mailed him about something. He responded, personally. He didn't need to do that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn't UVA violate federal discrimination law because of DEI? What is the point of this, more wasted money to show they are fighting Trump, despite the entire state and country agreeing that DEI is discriminatory?

Yes, absolutely UVA policies violated federal law, including the Civil Rights Act.

This fact cannot be challenged. Ryan resigned due to his desire to continue violating federal law.

No, they did not. This cynical attack on civil rights by twisting the Civil Rights Act is beyond the pale. Sort of like using Title IX (which these mouth-breathing knuckle-draggers opposed at the time) to attack trans people.

The mindset of conservatives is so vile and evil.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The situation at the University of Virginia is a clear example of how DEI policies have entered a new legal and political environment. UVA’s governing board shut down the university’s DEI office earlier this year after federal investigators questioned whether some of its past programs gave advantages based on race or other protected characteristics. The Department of Justice signaled that the university was at real risk of losing federal funding if it did not fully bring its policies in line with civil rights law. Under that pressure, President James Ryan chose to resign rather than drag the institution into a long fight with the federal government.

This was not simply a clash of politics. It was the result of a legal landscape that changed after the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling on race conscious admissions. Since then, federal agencies have scrutinized any DEI program that might involve quota systems or zero sum benefits tied to race or sex. UVA’s leadership had already started dismantling its DEI structure, but critics argued the changes were cosmetic. That disagreement created a credibility problem with federal regulators, which is ultimately what forced the crisis.

Anyone coming into office now needs to understand that this environment has not shifted back. If the new governor tries to push the same style of DEI programs that brought scrutiny to UVA, she risks repeating the same cycle. The issue is not whether diversity or inclusion can be supported. Those goals are legal and widely accepted. The problem is that certain DEI models rely on decision making that treats protected characteristics as factors in hiring, admissions, or funding. That is exactly what federal investigators are now targeting.

Unless future state policies focus strictly on equal opportunity approaches that avoid these legal pitfalls, the governor could walk straight into the same trap UVA just fell into.

Someone didn’t read the letter.

I read Spanberger’s letter, and the problem isn’t what she says it is. The crisis at UVA didn’t start with the Board’s presidential search. It started when federal investigators questioned whether parts of UVA’s DEI framework violated civil rights law. That pressure put federal funding at risk and is what led Ryan to step down. Calling it simple “federal overreach” skips the reason the scrutiny happened in the first place.

The governor-elect frames the Board as illegitimate, but the faculty votes and unconfirmed appointees are fallout from the same dispute about UVA’s direction. The Board acted to bring DEI policies into compliance with current federal standards. People may not like those decisions, but compliance is not optional.

Spanberger’s demand to pause the search until she can install new members isn’t just about transparency. It’s an attempt to reclaim control and potentially revive the same DEI approach that triggered federal intervention. If she pushes UVA back into that territory, she’ll run into the same legal and federal problems all over again. UVA needs stability and a president chosen on the university’s timeline, not a political one.