Seattle University has been hit with a federal civil rights complaint over scholarships and programs that select students on the basis of race and sex, including one that’s administered in partnership with Costco.

In its complaint, the Equal Protection Project cites three different scholarships and programs that advance the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) agenda, including one sponsored by the retail giant. The complaint, first viewed by The Daily Wire, calls on the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights to investigate the university and enforce civil rights law.

The Costco Scholarship Fund, which both Seattle University and the University of Washington participate in, is intended for “underrepresented students of color.”

William A. Jacobson, the founder of the Equal Protection Project, told The Daily Wire that the Costco program doesn’t outline specific racial or ethnic requirements, but that it could foster exclusionary practices.

“Costco has created a program for ‘underrepresented students of color’ but allows others to participate,” Jacobson said. “We call on Costco to make clear both in its program and in its partnerships with schools like SU that discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin is prohibited.”

Costco told The Daily Wire that the scholarship fund takes into account several factors when selecting recipients, including academic record, community service history, and whether or not the applicant is “part of an underserved group, such as youth in foster care, historically underrepresented minority students, and students who are the first in their family to pursue a college degree.” Costco added that “the program is legally compliant.”

Seattle University offers other programs explicitly designed for people of specific demographic backgrounds.

The Sinegal Fellowship, open to students who graduated from Seattle University’s undergraduate program and are going on to pursue an advanced degree at the school, is specifically designed for students who participated in the Costco Fund Scholarship. Seattle University states that the fellowship “provides support for underrepresented minority Costco scholars.”

“Creating educational opportunities based on race, color, national origin, or sex violates Titles VI and IX of the Civil Rights Act, as well as Washington State law and SU’s own non-discrimination policies,” Jacobson explained. “We are asking SU to live up to the law and its own rules, and to remove the discriminatory eligibility barriers it has erected.”

The university also offers the Justice Mary I. Yu Endowed Scholarship, which offers financial assistance to “underrepresented students at Seattle University School of Law, especially women of color.”

The Women of Seattle University Endowed Scholarship, available to current students who meet a certain GPA threshold, is targeted at “underrepresented student populations, especially women.”

Jacobson told The Daily Wire that Seattle University’s programs are in violation of the Civil Rights Act.

“Aggressive DEI programming must never be permitted to cross the line into unlawful discrimination in violation of the Civil Rights Act. This line, unfortunately, appears to have been breached at SU,” Jacobson said. “It is time for higher education everywhere to focus on the inherent worth and dignity of every student rather than categorizing students based on identity groups.”

Gift Dad an All Access Membership. Use code DAD40 at checkout to save 40%!

“The Equal Protection Project calls on the Department of Education to require the senior administration of SU to uphold nondiscrimination standards throughout the institution,” he added.

Seattle University did not respond to a request for comment.

Seattle University isn’t the first institution that the Equal Protection Project has hit with a federal civil rights complaint. It also reported the University of Rhode Island’s 51 DEI-focused scholarship offerings, which discriminated against white and male students. The complaint prompted a federal investigation from the Department of Education.

A recent study published in the academic journal Nature has been making headlines, claiming that if it were not for major oil and gas companies producing energy between 1991 and 2020, the world would be $28 trillion richer.

Study authors Christopher Callahan, a Stanford University postdoctoral scientist, and Justin Mankin, a Dartmouth College geography professor, authored the study, which was never peer-reviewed and uses a laughably absurd methodology developed by activists whose goal is to do the pseudo-science grunt work for climate change lawsuits against energy producers.

Single events cannot be attributed to climate change. Nevertheless, the study goes far beyond the ridiculous in its attempt not only to pin blame solely on individual energy producers but to attach a specific dollar amount to each company. Using dubious assumptions and their unsound “end-to-end” methodology, the authors cooked up an implausible correlation between individual companies and singular weather events alleged to have been caused or exacerbated by global warming. The bogus conclusions are then broken up into specific price tags and assigned to various energy producers.

Chevron, for example, is accused of being responsible for “heat-related losses” totaling $3.6 trillion from 1991 to 2020. Damages assigned to ExxonMobil amounted to $1.91 trillion during the same period, while the tally for Saudi Aramco came to $2.05 trillion. Together, the study blames the world’s energy producers for $28 trillion in damages. It would be an understatement to say that neither the study, nor its underlying assumptions, nor its conclusions should be accorded any credibility.

Given the elaborate contortions necessary to arrive at the study’s obviously preconceived conclusions, one might wonder what the motivation was to concoct it in the first place. The authors leave an enormous clue in their acknowledgements, in which they lavish praise upon individuals associated with the notorious law firm Sher Edling LLP for their help with the study. Sher Edling was created for the sole purpose of waging lawfare with the intent to financially destroy energy companies. While Sher Edling has worked with states and municipalities in initiating dozens of lawsuits attempting to set climate policy in courtrooms, none to date have been successful.

If just one of the firm’s lawsuits succeeds, it is expected to take up to a 30% chunk of an award estimated to be in the billions of dollars. Because the firm is bankrolled by millions of dollars in dark money funneled through far-Left organizations, its attacks are limitless — and so is its ability to buy studies supporting its conclusions and the fat payday they covet. Sher Edling has acknowledged commissioning made-for-litigation studies before. Named partner Vic Sher described working with scientist-for-hire Richard Heede during a 2017 talk at UCLA. That study, much like the new Nature research, purports to connect major energy providers with specific emissions activity.

A more honest study would have acknowledged the truly beneficial role that energy plays in our economy and everyday lives. We depend on fossil fuel energy for everything from the quality of our lives to our national security. It is so dependable that we rarely even consider that everything we eat, wear, buy, or sell depends on energy. It’s there to take us places and to cool and heat our homes. Smart devices, paint, asphalt, and plastic containers are just a few objects in our daily lives made from petroleum. The study would be more credible if it concluded the truth: that fossil fuels have contributed trillions of dollars in value and made human flourishing possible.

Several legacy news outlets — many of which accept funds from anti-fossil fuel advocacy organizations to write about global warming — reported on the Nature study while failing to note its utterly discrediting connection to Sher Edling. As we move into the warmer summer weather, we can expect more such studies and uncritical news stories.

Studies lacking basic integrity like the one published in Nature are why President Trump’s recent executive order “Restoring Gold Standard Science” is so timely and important. That standard holds that reproducibility, rigor, and unbiased peer review must be maintained. It demands that federal decisions be informed by only the most credible, reliable, and impartial scientific evidence available. Absolutely nothing about the Nature study meets the gold standard of science.

* * *

The Honorable Jason Isaac is the Founder and CEO of the American Energy Institute, a trade organization that unapologetically champions free markets and American energy. Previously, he served four terms in the Texas House of Representatives.

The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Gift Dad an All Access Membership. Use code DAD40 at checkout to save 40%!