Colleges and universities across the nation are rethinking their gung-ho promotion of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) — and not just in red states. This week, University of Michigan Provost Laurie McCauley announced that the school will no longer use diversity statements in faculty hiring, promotion and tenure, after a Board of Regents meeting Thursday. The University of Michigan did not require such diversity statements, but they had become ubiquitous.

The policy change follows the recommendation by an eight-member faculty working group, which convened in June and issued its report on October 31. The working group reviewed published literature, compared DEI policies at peer institutions, and surveyed nearly 2,000 faculty.

According to The University Record, a campus publication for Michigan faculty and staff, those who “disagreed … that diversity statements allow an institution to demonstrate a commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion” outnumbered those who agreed.

The working group also acknowledged and fairly represented criticism of diversity statements, a measure of open-mindedness that would have seemed impossible in the recent past. “Critics of diversity statements perceive them as expressions of personal identity traits, support of specific ideology or opinions on socially-relevant issues, and serve as a ‘litmus test’ of whether a faculty member’s views are politically acceptable,” they wrote.

In fact, “as currently enacted, diversity statements have the potential to limit viewpoints and reduce diversity of thought among faculty members,” the working group concluded.

The University of Michigan’s decision is noteworthy because the university is a distinguished promoter of DEI, spending $250 million on DEI programs since 2016. It is also noteworthy because the University of Michigan lacks the intense political pressure to remove DEI present in other states where public universities have tamped down their DEI programming, like Florida, Alabama, and Texas. With Democrats controlling the state senate and governor’s mansion, the University of Michigan would likely face no financial repercussions for continuing their DEI initiatives.

However, the University of Michigan is not entirely immune to political pressures. Unlike states such as Florida, the University of Michigan Board of Governors is not appointed (except in case of a vacancy) but elected. This makes the Michigan Board of Governors more receptive to public opinion than university boards in other states. If the Board of Governors needed a signal for where public opinion is, President-elect Donald Trump’s 80,000-vote victory in the state provides convincing evidence that Michigan voters are not especially keen to pursue left-wing, identity-based politics.

While the Board of Regents did vote to do away with diversity statements, they did not adopt two other recommendations issued by the working group. They declined to incorporate DEI content into teaching, research, and service statements, and they declined to bolster training about how to write and evaluate such content — two recommendations that would have bolstered DEI’s cause.

However, this decision does not mean that the University of Michigan has abandoned its DEI values altogether. In fact, McCauley’s statement reaffirmed, “Diversity, equity and inclusion are three of our core values at the university. … As we pursue this challenging and complex work, we will continuously refine our approach.” In other words, the university was simply forced to recognize the fact that diversity statements were a counterproductive means by which to achieve that end. This should not be surprising, since such statements effectively required ideological conformity, but it was.

Given the ivory tower’s isolated echo chamber, it’s hard to see the University of Michigan reaching such self-awareness on its own. It took the leadership of anti-DEI hippies — states like Florida and Alabama that bucked the DEI trend before it was cool — to abolish and defund DEI programs first. Once these states took the plunge, it caused leadership at other universities to reflect; and, upon reflection, even the University of Michigan realized that diversity statements did not make much sense.

But this does not mean that the University of Michigan — or, for that matter, committed progressive ideologues piloting public universities in red states — have abandoned the woke principles of DEI — far from it. Instead, these university administrators — who are nearly all left-leaning — have bowed to the political tides and removed the words “diversity,” “equity,” and “inclusion.” Many of the ideas and structures will live on under another name, to fight and be fought another day.

At least for a moment, however, the leftward march of these colleges and universities has been stalled and forced into hiding by vigilant public attention. A little sunshine is healthy, even — or perhaps especially — in the university.