A flurry of executive orders and presidential actions announced by the U.S. federal administration marked the start of 2025, including an executive order that targeted diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility, or DEIA, programs at all educational institutions in the United States. The executive order directed all federal agencies to “combat illegal private sector DEI preferences, mandates, policies, programs, and activities” and identify institutions of higher education with endowments of more than $1 billion for “potential civil compliance investigations.”
Campuses nationwide were affected. Harvard University’s Graduate School of Education eliminated its DEI office and laid off its chief diversity officer. Harvard, Cornell, and Northwestern universities, among others, have had federal funding withheld. Research grants have been canceled at top universities, including Princeton and Columbia, among a host of others. The Rutgers University Center for Minority Serving Institutions canceled a virtual conference on historically Black colleges and universities and associated apprenticeship programs, and the U.S. Military Academy at West Point disbanded a dozen clubs on campus related to gender and race, including its Society of Women Engineers group.
And the list goes on.
Fig. 1: Impact of Anti-DEI Legislation on SWE U.S. Collegiate Sections and Affiliates
“Every campus is seeing different impacts take place based on how their school is responding to DEI bans,” says Allie Huszcza, a material process and packaging delivery lead at Procter & Gamble in Cincinnati, Ohio. Huszcza served as the FY25 president of the SWE Virginia Tech Collegiate Section, where she was also the education outreach chair and vice president. “While some schools may not be seeing impacts just yet, most others are facing reduced university and corporate funding, stricter branding guidelines, loss of community, and/or a general lack of support from their universities. This is leading to losses in university resources that are vital, such as on-campus meeting spaces, organization bank accounts, access to club-promoting fairs, and others.”
Several schools are being asked to rename their SWE sections to remove the word “women” or disband altogether, she says.
“The changes we are witnessing on campuses across the country are deeply concerning, not only for the immediate impact they have on our SWE collegiate sections and affiliates, but for what they signal about the future of inclusion in engineering and technology,” says Tiffany Swanigan, CAE, SWE’s vice president of operations. “As SWE celebrates 75 years of impact, our mission is unchanged. We will continue to stand with our members, amplify their voices, and work tirelessly to ensure they have the resources, connections, and opportunities they need to succeed.”
SWE has more than 400 collegiate sections and affiliates across the U.S. These student-run groups are present in every state and provide a supportive community for any student pursuing science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, or STEM, degrees. These groups offer programming, outreach, and training that contribute to members’ individual professional development, equipping them with relevant and vital professional skills to succeed in the workforce.
Fig. 2: Campus-Level Impacts of Anti-Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Legislation
Members of these groups also have access to several crucial SWE educational resources, such as the Advance Learning Center’s online webinars and workshops; insights from global STEM experts shared in SWE’s award-winning magazine, podcast, and blog; and opportunities to network and build community through the SWE annual conference and WE Local events. With nearly 130 collegiate sections or affiliates located within the 16 states that currently report having DEI bans or restrictions, up to 30% of SWE’s collegiate groups could be impacted.
Addressing concerns
In response to the executive orders limiting university-supported DEI programs, the Society established an advisory council in April to provide strategic guidance and support to U.S. collegiate sections and affiliates. With collegiate sections calling for institutional support, financial flexibility, and visible solidarity from national leadership, SWE proactively invested in legal guidance, strategic communications, and peer-to-peer support resources to preserve member engagement, protect section viability, and uphold SWE’s mission.
The advisory council comprises a diverse group of stakeholders from the Society, ensuring broad representation across SWE as well as impacted and non-impacted geographical regions. The goal of the council is to develop recommendations for the SWE Board of Directors on how to best support its collegiate and affiliate members. The council has taken a multifaceted approach, outlining immediate and long-term action plans. This includes defining clear communication protocols, creating structured frameworks for operations, and developing a comprehensive action plan for collegiate sections and affiliates facing imminent or potential disbandment.
“Collegiate members are probably going to lose access to an important form of community across the nation and an important source of professional development,” says Abigail Fennell, a Ph.D. candidate in biomedical engineering at Johns Hopkins University. Fennell, collegiate director on the FY26 SWE Board of Directors and a member of the advisory council, says she has benefited from SWE’s Leadership Development Program and the Collegiate Leadership Institute. Both programs are available to all SWE collegiate members in good standing, irrespective of section or affiliate association.
“SWE is a great way for students to learn and leverage networking abilities and leadership capabilities within a safe, supportive community. It’s unfortunate that they might be losing the opportunity to do that,” she says.
As a first step, the advisory council collected data by administering a series of “pulse” surveys during the first quarter of 2025. The council sought to assess the impact of the executive orders and other actions on higher education institutions, understand the scope of the restrictions, and evaluate the needs of the collegiate sections. A total of 96 collegiate sections and affiliates participated from across 38 states, for a 23% response rate.
At the campus level, 74% of survey respondents reported impact or anticipated impact from anti-DEI legislation, including disruptions to policies, funding, and institutional support. Additionally, 68% reported organizational impacts or anticipated impacts on SWE collegiate sections and affiliates, resulting in shifts in programming, advisor disengagement, and pressures to rebrand. The results reveal that some of the challenges experienced include the removal of DEI language from communications and events (39%) and the elimination of DEI offices (35%), resulting in changes to events and sponsorships. Additionally, 16% reported their SWE funding was restricted or revoked, 13% had already renamed DEI programs, including SWE, and 9% were banned from hosting DEI-related events. Members are expressing fear or concern (23%) about the effect of these policies.
Fig. 3: Organizational Impacts on SWE U.S. Collegiate Sections and Affiliates
The survey results describe three common scenarios for SWE U.S. collegiate sections and affiliates:
- Some sections can no longer be affiliated with their university. This means no school support for any programming or events. “In a lot of cases, that means finding alternative locations for meetings, alternative funding sources, and having to restructure almost all their financial and logistical operations,” Fennell says.
- Some that aren’t being fully removed from their institutional support are nonetheless having to incorporate changes or adapt to restrictions. These include constraints on the marketing and branding of DEI-focused events, especially those involving women, girls, or affinity groups; forced modifications or rebranding of core programming; and restricting faculty advisors from using university channels to communicate about SWE activities. “They have a different struggle in trying to adhere to some of SWE’s guidelines and support SWE’s mission, while also perhaps catering to some institutional requirements that might seem to be in opposition,” says Fennell. “Those sections are trying to walk a fine line and maintain some of their operations, programming, and events, while also having to balance somewhat contradictory restrictions.”
- A third group hasn’t been impacted yet, but they are operating in an environment of uncertainty, and many are considering proactive changes. Some 37% of respondents say it is business as usual for them, and 33% are not affected by the executive orders.
Fennell says she is fortunate to be on a campus that has not been impacted yet, but she senses an air of caution from not knowing what’s next. The fear of the unknown is keeping some groups from “taking any risks or any stands,” she says. That might mean withdrawing certain programs or rewriting language in public-facing documentation and websites, she says.
“Sections at Johns Hopkins are continuing to operate, to hold events, but they have been having some conversations about what it means to drill down on that communication and ensure that everyone knows that they’re welcome at SWE events and can participate fully and support SWE’s mission, regardless of their own identity.”
Devising solutions
To hear directly from impacted members and help shape the most effective and relevant solutions, the advisory council organized three focus groups earlier this year. These included faculty advisors of collegiate sections, professional section leaders, and collegiate section leaders and graduate students. The key topics were the impacts of federal and state-level DEI legislation, actions taken by collegiate sections in response, and resources and support needed from SWE.
The areas identified during the focus group meetings include advocacy and public positioning, guidance and resources, financial relief and sponsorship support, section-to-section support, and transparency and community building.
Members at different levels require different types of support, the focus groups revealed:
- Faculty advisors of collegiate sections need operational and financial support, legal guidance and language tools, and mental health and learning resources. They hope to redefine the value of SWE membership for students who can no longer engage in traditional ways.
- Professional section leaders need resource development, advice on how to structure sections, and advocacy and visibility through collaboration with other affinity organizations. They also require guidance on legal and operational boundaries.
- Collegiate sections need a centralized funding pool, communication templates, guidelines for increasing transparency and visibility, opportunities for networking and solidarity, and strategies for increasing alumni engagement.
Continuing efforts
While short-term difficulties in finding meeting spaces or funding are a concern, says Huszcza, an advisory council member and member of the SWE Collegiate Advisory Board that was piloted throughout FY25, “The biggest and most concerning long-term consequence would be collegiate membership engagement and retention falling across the U.S., which could have detrimental effects in the coming years.”
Fennell points out that much depends on whether these changes are deemed legal, how many of them are deemed binding, and how many of these changes will remain in place over the next several years. “It will open new dialogue about what true inclusivity means and how we can support and advocate for historically excluded groups, from a perspective of bringing everyone to the same level to give them the same opportunities,” she says. “There’s this gap in understanding that people are not all starting from the same place. And communities and organizations like SWE are trying to close some of that gap to ensure that everyone is empowered to reach their full potential. That conversation is still happening.”
The advisory council is advancing a strategic set of actions to address the evolving needs of collegiate sections, prioritizing potential rebranding and restructuring to remain aligned with shifting legislation. Backed by the board’s full support, the council is also developing and launching a suite of targeted resources to strengthen and support impacted collegiate sections and affiliates, including:
- Independent operating models. Structures to enable collegiate sections to function outside university systems, with guidance on legal and financial logistics.
- Professional section partnerships. Methods for connecting at-risk collegiate groups with local professional sections for shared resources and mentorship.
- Resource toolkits. Templates and guidance to support operations beyond traditional campus frameworks while staying connected to SWE.
- Advocacy support. Safe, compliant ways for members to engage in advocacy without jeopardizing their status.
- Sustainable funding: Identifying various funding sources, including philanthropic and corporate sources, to replace lost university funding.
SWE collegiate members can reach out to SWE directly with questions or concerns about collegiate sections and affiliates at strongertogether@swe.org. More details on these resources can be found here.
