West Point - DEI , Dead or Alive?

West Point once had a formal Diversity and Inclusion Studies Minor. That fact matters because it was not just a speech, a club, or an informal leadership theme. It was an academic program. It drew from several departments and included courses on social inequality, power and difference, race, gender, sexuality, religion, civil rights, and American history. The public record now shows that the minor has been formally ended. West Point’s GY2029 Redbook Appendix states that the Diversity and Inclusion Studies Minor was sunset, with GY2024 as the last official class year, and that EN352 Power and Difference was archived. The same appendix also lists PL377 Social Inequality, HI461 Topics in Gender History, and HI463 Race, Ethnicity, Nation as archived courses. That is strong evidence that the old minor was not simply left in place under its original title. (West Point Redbook)

The question is whether that formal change ended DEI at West Point, or whether some parts continued under different names, different offices, or ordinary academic courses. That is a harder question. It cannot be answered fairly by saying that any course mentioning race, gender, religion, or civil rights is automatically DEI. Military officers need to understand those subjects. They also need to understand American constitutional law, civil-military relations, religious conflict, social tension, and the history of equal protection. The issue is not whether cadets are still taught about difficult subjects. The issue is whether West Point is still maintaining a DEI program, teaching DEI doctrine as official truth, or using race or sex as a basis for preference, penalty, or institutional policy.

President Trump’s January 27, 2025 executive order, “Restoring America’s Fighting Force,” directed the Armed Forces away from race- or sex-based preference and away from official instruction built around “divisive concepts,” race or sex stereotyping, race or sex scapegoating, and gender ideology. The White House described the order as part of a broader effort to restore merit, lethality, and unity within the military. (The White House) Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth followed with a January 29, 2025 memorandum stating that DEI policies, as defined by the order, were incompatible with DoD values; that DoD would provide merit-based, color-blind equal opportunities; and that DoD would not guarantee or strive for equal outcomes. (U.S. Department of War) DoD then created a task force to eliminate DEI offices and initiatives and later announced that the task force had moved into a validation phase, including visits to service academies and other installations. (U.S. Department of War) In May 2025, DoD reported that the task force had validated successful DEI elimination across the department. (U.S. Department of War)

West Point took visible action after the order. Public reporting stated that the Academy disbanded a dozen cadet clubs tied to ethnicity, gender, race, or sexuality, and that it was reviewing activities connected to the former diversity office. (AP News) Those actions support the argument that West Point was trying to comply with the order, at least at the formal and public-facing level. The closure of clubs, the disappearance or reorganization of the DEI office, and the sunsetting of the DEI minor all point in the same direction.

The former office responsible for DEI was the Office of Diversity, Inclusion and Equal Opportunity, often referred to as ODIEO. The previously identified DEI-related staff included Terry L. Allbritton, Chief Diversity Officer; LTC Channing M. Greene, Equal Opportunity Program Manager; Ellen Peterson, Diversity Program Specialist; MSG Michael R. Holmberg, USMA Equal Opportunity Advisor; SFC Marcelo Figueroa, USCC Equal Opportunity Advisor; Amos Maldonado, Diversity Administrative Officer; and Lisa M. Benitez, later associated with the Chief Diversity Officer or Engagement and Retention role. The later office became known as the Office of Engagement and Retention, and the names found in that later structure included Lisa M. Benitez as Chief Engagement and Retention Officer and Amos Maldonado in an engagement, retention, program, or training role. The current West Point directory result now lists Lisa M. Benitez as Deputy BTO, not as a DEI officer. (West Point)

That staff history creates a legitimate question. If an office called “Diversity and Inclusion” disappears, but some of the same people continue in a new office called “Engagement and Retention,” one could argue that the institution changed labels more than mission. On the other hand, people often remain employed after a reorganization while their duties change. The public record does not prove that former DEI staff are still running DEI programs. It proves only that some personnel names appear across different organizational periods. That is enough to justify scrutiny, but not enough to prove noncompliance.

The course issue is similar. Several former DEI-minor courses were archived, but not every course connected to the old minor disappeared. HI398 Civil Rights in American History remains publicly listed in West Point’s course system. Its description says it studies civil rights from 1865 to the present, with attention to African American civil rights and comparative discussion of race, class, gender, citizenship, and other movements. (West Point Courses) That clearly overlaps with subjects that were part of the former DEI minor. But civil rights history is also a legitimate academic subject, especially at a federal military academy that trains officers to serve under the Constitution. The course would be a compliance concern only if it teaches race- or sex-based preference, official guilt or blame by group identity, or required ideological conclusions. A public course description alone does not prove that.

HI391 World Religions also remains listed. Its description focuses on major world religions, cultural expression, politics, society, and history. (West Point Courses) That is not inherently DEI. For Army officers, religious literacy can be operationally useful. A lieutenant deployed overseas may need to understand local religious practices, sectarian divisions, or the connection between religion and politics. Calling that DEI would be too broad.

LW199 Civil Rights Staff Ride is more complicated. The older public description stated that “diversity is of critical importance to our nation and our Army” and described the course as a study of civil rights to gain appreciation for diversity. (West Point Courses) A later Law and Philosophy catalog listing shows LW199 Civil Rights Staff Ride as a course in the department’s catalog, but the public search result available does not provide an instructor name. (West Point Courses) This course deserves closer review because the older wording was plainly diversity-centered. Still, even a civil rights staff ride can be proper if it teaches law, history, leadership, and constitutional duty rather than DEI ideology.

The same limit applies to instructor names. West Point’s public course pages identify the courses, departments, descriptions, offerings, enrollment information, or degree tracks, but the pages I found do not publicly list current instructors for HI398, HI391, LW199, or the other surviving related courses. Therefore, I would not name current instructors without a roster, syllabus, or official departmental listing. To do so would overstate the evidence.

The strongest case that West Point is in compliance is substantial. The former DEI minor is gone. Several courses most closely tied to that minor have been archived. The former DEI office no longer appears publicly under the old ODIEO identity. DEI-sponsored or identity-based cadet clubs were disbanded. DoD created a task force, reviewed the service academies, and publicly stated that DEI elimination had been successfully validated across the department. On those facts, West Point appears to have made real structural changes, not just cosmetic edits.

The strongest case for continued concern is also real. Some courses still teach subjects that substantially overlap with the former DEI minor: race, gender, civil rights, citizenship, religion, and social movements. Some former DEI staff names appear to have continued in later engagement or retention roles. Some course descriptions may have been edited without making it clear whether the classroom content changed. A skeptical reader could reasonably ask whether DEI was eliminated or simply absorbed into less obvious channels.

My evaluation is this: West Point appears to be in formal compliance with President Trump’s order, but full substantive compliance cannot be proven from public documents alone. Formal compliance means the visible DEI minor, office structure, club sponsorships, and catalog language have been changed or removed. Substantive compliance would require knowing what is actually taught in classrooms, what training materials remain in use, what duties were assigned to former DEI staff, and whether any office still advances race- or sex-based preference under different language.

The pro-compliance argument is stronger on the documents. West Point has removed the most obvious DEI structures. The concern argument is stronger as a warning. A military academy can remove the word “DEI” and still preserve the habits, assumptions, or curriculum of DEI if no one reviews the substance. The fair conclusion is not that West Point is proven guilty of evasion. It is that West Point’s public record shows formal compliance, while its remaining civil-rights, race, gender, religion, and engagement-related programs deserve continued review to ensure that officer education remains historical, legal, merit-based, and mission-focused rather than ideological.