Relative to diversity, equity, and inclusion.
SCR 89 is a nonbinding Senate Concurrent Resolution that states the California Legislature’s support for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). It frames DEI as consistent with the American Dream, civil rights history, and California’s policy goals, and it cites examples such as the Nineteenth Amendment, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Americans with Disabilities Act as part of the broader legal tradition of expanding access and opportunity. The resolution also references prior California actions, including a 2022 executive order directing state agencies to embed equity considerations in their work and earlier legislative efforts to examine equity impact analysis in the bill process.
The resolution does not change substantive law or create new regulatory requirements. Instead, it expresses the Legislature’s position and encourages local, state, and federal policymakers, educational institutions, workplaces, and other organizations to adopt and uphold DEI principles. Its stated goals include promoting inclusivity, protecting freedom of expression, removing barriers to participation, and supporting equitable opportunities across education, employment, housing, health care, and civic life. Because it is a concurrent resolution, its practical effect is primarily symbolic and declaratory rather than operational.
The general sentiment reflected in the bill text and voting history is strongly supportive of DEI. The resolution is written in affirmative, expansive language and presents DEI as a core democratic and civil-rights value. The recorded votes suggest it advanced with clear majority support at multiple stages, though not unanimously, indicating broad but not universal agreement.
The main point of contention is the broader political debate over DEI itself. The resolution explicitly responds to efforts to restrict or dismantle DEI programs, including federal actions and policies associated with the Trump administration, and it argues that such efforts undermine civil rights and free expression. Opponents of DEI policies are not directly quoted in the bill, but the resolution’s framing makes clear that criticism centers on whether DEI promotes inclusion and equity or instead represents an improper ideological or governmental intrusion. The bill positions itself firmly on the pro-DEI side of that debate.
SCR 89 would not amend the California Codes or impose new duties on agencies, employers, schools, or local governments. Its legal effect is limited to a formal legislative statement affirming support for DEI and urging policymakers and organizations to continue or adopt DEI-oriented practices. The measure may influence future policy discussions, committee analysis, and institutional practices, but it does not itself create enforceable rights, penalties, or funding changes.
The overall sentiment is supportive and affirmative. The resolution is framed as a defense of civil rights, equal opportunity, and inclusion, and the vote history indicates it moved forward with substantial support. The limited opposition implied by the recorded votes suggests some resistance, but the available materials show the bill as broadly favored among its supporters and aligned with a larger pro-DEI coalition.
The central contention is the role of DEI in public institutions and whether such programs advance equity or should be curtailed. The resolution explicitly rejects efforts to ban or weaken DEI, arguing that those efforts harm civil rights, free expression, and representative leadership, especially for communities of color, Indigenous peoples, women, LGBTQ+ people, and people with disabilities. Critics of DEI are not identified in the record, but the bill’s language shows that the dispute is both ideological and policy-based, with disagreement over whether DEI is a necessary corrective to systemic inequities or an inappropriate framework for government and institutions.