House Bill 2 has become a multi-billion dollar topic of conversation for UNC. The school system has found itself in between two governing powers, both with the tenacity to see their fights out to the bitter end. As the lawsuits pile up and the state becomes more divided, it is clear that the costs of this fight are only increasing.
As it stands, the United States’ Department of Justice has declared North Carolina — and by extension, the University of North Carolina — in violation of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964. This comes with the repercussions of potentially losing federal funding.
Before the DOJ’s announcement, UNC had certain incentives to follow the North Carolina law no matter how the leaders felt, but those incentives have now changed. UNC System President Margaret Spellings and the Board of Governors have both a practical and moral imperative to fully renounce and effectively stop any enforcement of the law.
Regardless of one’s feelings about the Bill, this substantial loss of income to a beloved and necessary institution in this state is simply something that cannot be allowed to happen. On Monday, Spellings made a statement essentially promoting the fine line rhetoric between not being in violation of federal law and not outright defying N.C. law — this is not enough given the larger political contexts. Spellings needs to take a hard stance against this bill or the System could suffer both in terms of income and public perceptions of the System’s commitment to nondiscrimination and safety.
The longer this bill stands the longer potential students, other states and the broader academic community continues to associate UNC with this bill. While this association with bigots in Raleigh may not be completely eradicated by a strong stance against H.B. 2 by the University System, it would help show those paying attention that UNC is committed to leading the fight against discrimination and bigotry wherever it is to be found.
These are just a few of the practical reasons why the leaders of this University System have reason to fully reject H.B. 2. When these practical reasons are coupled with the fact that this bill harms UNC trans students and faculty, it becomes clear what the path forward should be for the administration. The time for finding loopholes or trying to find middle ground is over in terms of how the University System ought to prioritize itself — if UNC is really committed to safety then it has a moral obligation to stand with the federal government that is just as strong as the practical obligations.
This bill, to echo the words of Loretta Lynch, actively seeks to belittle the dignity of UNC trans students and the trans citizens of this state. This type of discrimination should have never happened in the first place, but it did and now it is up to all actors within this state to rise up and challenge those in Raleigh that want to create a class of citizens in this state with less rights than their cis counterparts. It is imperative that this blemish on our state’s history translates into votes for those that oppose H.B. 2, and result in the ousting of the politicians that put us in this state.
The System must provide for the safety of its student regardless of any climates, and if H.B. 2 is making certain students feel unsafe on a campus that belongs to them, then those appointed to power have a responsibility to act with the powers that were allotted to them. In failing to not take a hard stance against H.B. 2, the System serves to lose federal funding, seem uncommitted to equity in the eyes of the larger public — and most importantly — it fails to show its trans students that it cares enough about their wellbeing to stick its neck on the line. North Carolina, and especially UNC, is better than this.
