Senate adopts law restricting diversity, equity and inclusion offices and programs in Mississippi public schools and colleges

The Mississippi Senate adopted a strike‑all amendment and passed House Bill 11‑93 on final passage, a measure that defines “diversity, equity and inclusion” activities and limits public‑school, community college and higher‑education spending, offices and practices tied to those activities.

The bill’s sponsor told the Senate the act is meant to bar institutions from establishing DEI offices, hiring staff to perform DEI duties using state funds, requiring DEI statements, or awarding preferences in employment or admissions “based upon race, color, ethnicity, gender identity, or sexual orientation,” except where federal or state law requires otherwise.

Supporters argued the language provides statewide clarity and directs local governing boards to adopt complaint and investigatory procedures. Under the bill the board of trustees for state institutions of higher learning, the Mississippi Community College Board, the Mississippi Board of Education and the Mississippi Charter School Board must adopt complaint processes and investigative procedures within 120 days. If a complainant is dissatisfied with a board’s investigation, the bill directs that person to the attorney general’s office for a further review.

Senator McCahon, who explained the strike‑all on the floor, summarized the bill’s definitional provisions, saying the measure identifies a set of excluded practices and gives examples of what falls within the statute’s reach. He said the definition covers “any effort to require trainings, programming, or activities designed or implemented to change participants’ beliefs with reference to race, color, ethnicity, gender identity, or sexual orientation.” He also stated the bill allows exceptions for compliance with state or federal law, scholarly research, student organizations and programs for academic achievement.

Opponents said the bill will roll back programs intended to address historic inequities and could have broad effects on campus programming, hiring and student services.

Senator Frasier, opposing the bill on the floor, said the measure ‘‘demonizes this idea of diversity, equity, and inclusion’’ and warned it could erode remedies meant to address long‑standing disparities in education and state institutions. “What I foresee is that someone is going to say that HBCUs are a DEI instrument,” he said, arguing the bill could be used to challenge historically black colleges and universities and other targeted programs.

Senators questioned specific coverage (for example, whether student organizations or African American studies programs would be affected) and the practical effect on university hiring and classroom instruction. The sponsor and other backers said the bill contains narrow, enumerated exceptions for student groups, accredited research and programs required by law, and they emphasized the agency‑level complaint and review process.

On final passage the Senate called the roll and recorded the bill as passed by recorded vote; the clerk announced the result as 34 yeas and 14 nays. A subsequent entry on the Senate calendar shows a motion to reconsider was filed and the item was held under a motion to reconsider for later consideration.

The law requires boards to report annually on complaints and alleged violations and permits institutions to ‘‘self‑certify’’ when appropriate. The bill text directs boards to develop penalties and disciplinary procedures for employees or contractors found to violate the statute. The measure expressly preserves compliance with federal law.

Observers, university officials and some lawmakers noted the bill leaves interpretation and implementation to state boards and the attorney general, which means local policies and the AG’s eventual guidance will shape how the law is enforced going forward.

The bill text, as described on the Senate floor, includes detailed lists of practices the Legislature will treat as DEI activity for the statute’s purposes, enumerates covered entities and creates an administrative pathway for complaints and AG review. Supporters said the measure provides state guidance to avoid differing campus policies; opponents said it risks chilling diversity‑related programs and administrative measures currently in place.

Votes and next steps: The bill passed the Senate on an afternoon roll call; the clerk announced the vote as 34 yeas and 14 nays. The record also shows members requested a motion to reconsider, and the item was later held under that motion, which means further action could occur before final enactment or conference with the House.