As universities and colleges prepare for the 2025-2026 school year, some Ohio students are coming back to empty offices that once housed programs that made them feel at home. SB 1, or Advance Ohio Higher Education Act, is a controversial bill signed into law in the spring that has decimated student support centers, eliminating all diversity-related programming. 

The law bars programs related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) within public higher education, restricts the ability for professors to strike, and requires “intellectual diversity” in classroom curriculum and discussion. Exceptions can be requested by the university administration to obtain grants and accreditation.   

Across the state, women’s centers that offered leadership programs, educational panel discussions, and reproductive and sexual wellness resources have been shut down. So have LGBTQIA+ centers that offered donation-backed financial assistance, free clothing closets, and community-building events. The doors to multicultural centers that offered mentorship, professional development workshops, and scholarships have shuttered, too. 

Some of these programs are now unofficially being taken on by student-run clubs, students enrolled in Ohio universities told Prism. Some resources that are deemed SB 1-compliant will be carried out by other offices. 

“I was just shocked and confused at first. My initial reaction was like, ‘There’s no way this is happening, right?’” said Audrey Ansel, a rising senior at Ohio University who worked at the school’s Pride Center. “This is my college education. This is my college experience. This is not something that I feel that the state House should have so much control over, especially just in the world that we’re living in and seeing so much anti-LGBTQ legislation in the last couple of years.”

Higher education hasn’t always been accessible to students of marginalized backgrounds. Discrimination, rising costs, the generational wealth gap, and a lack of institutional support are just some of the hurdles set before low-income students, students of color, and queer students in their effort to access higher education or graduate. 

Schools have long tried to close the diversity gaps by providing support for underrepresented groups on their campuses, in part through the creation of these student centers, open to all but geared toward specific students.

“Sometimes that looked like clothing, sometimes that looked like health care, and sometimes it just looked like friendship,” Ansel said. 

Under SB 1, a new generation of college students will have to grapple with the next phase of their education without this targeted support. Kylie Bridgeman, a rising senior at Ohio University, said she was “miserable” during her first semester before she began venturing to the multicultural center in between classes and joined a historically Black sorority. 

“I didn’t realize how important having a community of other strong Black men and women was until I didn’t have it right at my fingertips anymore, walking out of high school,” Bridgeman said.

As she heads into her last year of college without many of the resources that helped shape her experiences so far, she and other students are left to create such spaces for themselves and future students. 

“The loss honestly can’t be understated, because as much as us student leaders and allies on campus will continue to create spaces and cultivate that community … it feels like we’re becoming a little invisible in the face of some tough legislation,” she said.

Ohio universities have said they’re going to continue to give their students what they need to succeed, regardless of SB 1’s restrictions, but that the support may look different under the new law.

Ohio State, for example, announced that it is creating two new centers to address student concerns. One center is expected to house an “on-campus food pantry, free hygiene products, professional clothing and more,” according to the website. The other is intended to host mentorship and professional development workshops, as well as events focusing on civil discourse and community building. 

“Ohio State has a long history of welcoming individuals from all backgrounds,” said Benjamin Johnson, Ohio State’s assistant vice president of media and public relations, in an emailed statement. “That will not change. Our goal is to ensure the university continues to be a place where all students receive the support they need, while following the letter and spirit of the laws and regulations that govern us.”

The law pushed one Ohio State University recruiter to resign after two years on the job. 

“As soon as I got this news, I was thinking about how I was expected to go up in front of a bunch of students and present to them and convince them to come to Ohio State,” said Kieran Duhl, who publicly announced their resignation at an event geared toward multicultural students. 

They say they were at a breakfast for prospective students, when the first question a family asked them was about the diversity program closures. 

“I know that it’s important to students, especially when it’s students who are moving across state lines to come to this school, and also Black students, marginalized students, people of color who are coming to this university and knowing that it’s a [predominantly white institution],” said Duhl. About 60% of students enrolled at Ohio State are white, according to the most recent data available on the school’s website.

Duhl’s circumstances encapsulate the fears of the American Association of University Professors’ (AAUP) Ohio Conference, which represents roughly 6,000 professors at Ohio’s institutions of higher education. 

Sara Kilpatrick, the executive director of the Ohio conference AAUP, said recruiting and retaining faculty and students has proven difficult in the law’s aftermath.

“We are going to lose Ohio students to other states because they may want to go to a state where they’re at an institution that has a women’s center or multicultural center, or that doesn’t have these restrictions, or they don’t feel that their faculty can’t talk about certain things in the classroom,” said Kilpatrick, adding that some faculty and staff have already left state universities. 

The only diversity allowed to be championed on college campuses, according to the law, is “intellectual diversity,” which is defined as “multiple, divergent, and varied perspectives on an extensive range of public policy issues.” 

DEI, which refers to programs typically aimed at eliminating discrimination and making campuses accessible to people of all backgrounds, is listed as a “controversial belief or policy,” according to SB 1. 

Supporters of the legislation, like SB 1 sponsor state Sen. Jerry Cirino, claim that diversity programs are discriminatory because of their race- or gender-conscious nature. 

“We want every student in Ohio, regardless of race, gender, or religion, to be able to pursue their choice of post-secondary education,” said Cirino in a statement on the announcement of the bill. “However, DEI programs are inherently discriminatory and cannot be tolerated or paid for by taxpayers.” Cirino did not respond to requests from Prism for further comment. 

DEI programs were built on the foundation of the Civil Rights Act, which explicitly outlawed discrimination against marginalized groups, according to Human Rights Watch. DEI programs are intended to address policies and practices that perpetuate discrimination and inequality. 

If Ohio’s public universities and community colleges don’t comply with the restrictions, the General Assembly could determine to withhold or remove the institution’s state funding. This follows similar anti-DEI efforts that have sprung up in states across the country in recent years and been adopted on a national level via President Donald Trump’s executive orders. Florida and Texas also saw DEI office closures, the elimination of DEI-related administrative positions, and the cancellation of some course offerings that violated the new restrictions.

The new laws have not just impacted classrooms, but have also led to a wave of layoffs affecting the federal government and the private sector, as the clock is turned back on the racial equity initiatives that were established in response to the 2020 anti-police brutality protests.

Editorial Team:
Carolyn Copeland, Lead Editor
Lara Witt, Top Editor
Rashmee Kumar, Copy Editor