“Not everything that is faced can be changed; but nothing can be changed until it is faced,” James Baldwin wrote in a 1962 essay published in The New York Times, urging writers to “speak out about the world as it is.” Yet, following this guidance is challenging in a nation where some are attempting to limit discussions about racism and other forms of prejudice. Last year, the Department of Defense “banned more than 596 titles from its military schools,” characterizing them as “woke.” Their list included classics like “The Color Purple” by Alice Walker, “The New Jim Crow” by Michelle Alexander, and “The Nickel Boys” by Colson Whitehead, as well as other works that highlight the experiences of marginalized groups. While U.S. District Judge Patricia Tolliver Giles ordered the Trump administration to “restore the library books and circulating materials,” their loss didn’t entirely curtail their efforts. Following an executive order that eliminated diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts within federal departments, contractors, and grant recipients, “more than 1,000 nonprofits” removed this language from mission statements in tax filings, according to a ProPublica report. Such a night-and-day shift highlights the chilling effect of these policies.

Racism is not simply a historical problem, but a modern one. The racial wealth gap, which has persisted since the abolition of slavery, is perhaps one of the most salient examples. However, when considered alongside the disparate treatment Black people endure in the criminal justice, banking, education, and healthcare systems, the problem is as clear as a quartz crystal. Yet, the Trump administration has embraced a platform rooted in denial. For example, last month, the Department of Justice “rescinded its longstanding disparate-impact regulations under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.” As a result of this policy, federal authorities will no longer establish “liability based solely on statistical disparities,” but instead will “require proof of intentional discrimination.” This policy makes it harder to address racism that Black people and other racial minorities endure. Consider, for instance, that Black students are more than twice as likely to attend underfunded schools. This disparity is the intergenerational consequence of racial redlining and other discriminatory policies. Because homes in black communities are considered less valuable, less tax revenue is allocated to public education there. Racism is baked into our society. So, narrowly focusing on instances where racist intentions can be proven overlooks the effects of systemic racism.

“The very heart of racism is denial. Where there is suffering from racist policies, there are denials that those policies are racist. The beat of denial sounds the same across space and time,” author Ibram X. Kendi wrote in a 2018 New York Times op-ed. It is not easy to determine whether a White person is racist, as they can easily deny such allegations to avoid negative social consequences. Even those caught saying something inappropriate often double down on the claim that they’re not racist. In a 2015 leaked audio, professional wrestler Hulk Hogan used the n-word several times, expressing disapproval for his daughter dating some Black men, but denied being a racist. In 2013, employees of Paula Deen, a cooking show host, filed a discrimination lawsuit. A “chef admitted to using the N-word and saying that she wanted a ‘plantation-style wedding’ with waiters dressed as slaves.” Transcripts from the deposition suggest Paula Deen laughed at the comment and suggested they couldn’t have a “true southern wedding” because “the media” wouldn’t approve. Without that leaked information, no one would know these figures, and others would have endorsed racist ideas. Thus, creating a standard where racial discrimination is permitted unless it is expressed explicitly creates a safe haven for racists.

Researchers examine the disparate impact of laws and policies because this approach reveals patterns in the data that a single case study or cherry-picked selection of examples cannot, thereby allowing us to understand social problems, such as the impact of racism on Black people, with greater clarity. We can’t always determine, for instance, whether a particular police officer is racist, but we have data that shows “racial disparities in arrests, police misconduct, and police use of force continue,” as Emily Widra wrote for the Prison Policy Institute. Black people are killed by police officers at nearly 3x the rate as White people, and 1 in 1,000 Black men can expect to die of police brutality throughout their lifetimes. At a time when we should be calling for increased transparency, the Trump administration is moving the goalpost. Since the statistical data overwhelmingly reveal the problem racism, prejudice, and bias pose, he’s saying not to look at that data and instructing his administration to halt previous attempts to address the problem. It’s like that line from George Orwell’s book 1984, “the party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

While some believe that endorsing colorblind ideology is a neutral, safe stance to take, those who deny the significance of race are less likely to address racism. As Samuel R. Summers, a social psychologist and professor, suggested, “If Whites are hesitant to use racial category labels to describe other people (even when this information is diagnostic and useful), just imagine how unlikely the average White person is to admit that her judgement has been colored by race.” When people feel uncomfortable talking about race, even when it’s done to address racial inequality, they are also hesitant to acknowledge racism on their part, or in regard to society more broadly. For instance, findings from my doctoral study suggested that those who endorse colorblind racial attitudes are more likely to deny the effects of institutional racism (Gaines, 2024). While it was originally hypothesized that those with a higher social dominance orientation would be more likely to oppose hierarchy-attenuating programs, it was actually those who overlooked the impact of racism that posed the greatest resistance.

The Trump administration has increased the burden for individuals reporting discrimination. For instance, while “disparate impact claims make it possible to challenge systemic discrimination that would otherwise go unaddressed,” officials have rolled back anti-discrimination rules that have been in place for fifty years. Under the Trump administration, “civil rights and equal employment opportunity have been shuttered across the executive branch.” And the results are dismal — “fewer people able to obtain living-wage jobs, fewer students able to use education as a tool to better their circumstances, fewer families able to find affordable homes.” The National Institute for Workers’ Rights suggested the fight to maintain this mechanism is bigger than a single policy; it “is about defending the principle of equal opportunity that moves our communities and our country forward.”

“What I argue is that denials of racism are expected, ubiquitous, and seemingly inevitable. They therefore provide little assistance in determining whether bias has actually occurred.” — Samuel R. Summers

Since returning to the office, Trump’s “personal attorneys and other anti-civil rights extremists” have taken “positions responsible for enforcing landmark civil rights laws. One report suggested racial harassment of Black students has been “ignored under Trump.” Despite White students using racial slurs and making monkey noises, and engaging in mock slave auctions, investigations into these cases have either stalled or been abandoned. Failing to hold racists accountable only further exacerbates the problem, making this behavior more socially acceptable. Last March, the administration announced its intention to withdraw from a decades-old desegregation consent decree in Louisiana.

Some changes are superficial, such as Trump ordering the removal of Martin Luther King Jr. Day and Juneteenth from the list of days of fee-free days for federal parks and museums. While he cannot legally eliminate these federal holidays on his own, as such a change would require congressional approval, this policy was yet another sign of the times. Discussions about Black history are less accessible to the public, given the steps taken by the administration. But beyond that, they’ve also made it harder to hold racists accountable or confront the effects of systemic racism. When it comes to racism in America, some are afraid to hold a mirror up, to see the nation for what it is, but as Baldwin suggested, writers have a responsibility to do so, even when their efforts challenge the narratives promoted by those in positions of power.