Institutional Racism and the Silencing of Erudite Black Scholars at URI

After a year of conducting interviews and analyzing data from faculty, staff, and students, Professor Louis Kwame Fosu documented a disturbing pattern at the University of Rhode Island (URI): highly qualified African-American professors and administrators—particularly those with ancestral lineage to American slavery—are routinely excluded from leadership positions. As of 2020, African-American and Latino faculty represented just 3.3% and 2.8% of the university’s workforce, respectively (Dr. Harry Alston, 2020).

One of the most egregious examples of this exclusion was the treatment of Dr. Harry Alston, a distinguished Black administrator whose career was systematically undermined by URI’s overwhelmingly white liberal leadership. Instead of hiring competent African-American professionals to lead its diversity efforts, URI appointed an unqualified Chief Diversity Officer who was neither African-American nor equipped to address the complex racial dynamics on campus. The university’s DEI programs were dominated by white women and LGBTQ leadership under Dean Jeannette Riley, who repeatedly hired underqualified individuals while marginalizing and terminating erudite Black professors and administrators.

Professor Fosu argued that had URI simply adhered to the U.S. Constitution and civil rights regulations, equitable and merit-based hiring would have been inevitable. Instead, the DEI framework at URI served as a covert tool of exclusion—dehumanizing Black and Latino professionals while projecting a false image of inclusivity. Outspoken and principled African-American scholars were often harassed or forced out, especially those who dared to speak candidly about institutional racism within liberal academic environments.

Dr. Fosu further observed that Black civil rights experts and highly credentialed scholars—like Dr. Alston and Dr. Sylvia Spears—were consistently passed over or removed despite being the most qualified candidates in competitive job searches. Their rejection highlighted a troubling trend: progressive institutions like URI often view intellectually rigorous Black Americans as threats to the status quo.

Meanwhile, compliant Blacks or people of color, especially those without lineage to American slavery or those willing to remain silent, were more likely to receive high-paying roles. Dr. Fosu noted that in the aftermath of the failed hiring processes for Dr. Alston and Dr. Spears, several African-American staff members who had remained silent or complicit were subsequently promoted—raising serious questions about tokenism and institutional loyalty over justice.

Fake Job Interviews and Patterns of Systemic Discrimination at URI

Job interviews at the University of Rhode Island—including those for high-profile roles like the Chief Diversity Officer—have followed a troubling pattern of manipulation and bad faith. According to documented observations, many of these interviews were staged to appear legitimate, while the outcome was predetermined in favor of candidates who were either favored by URI’s overwhelmingly white liberal leadership or deemed easily controllable and lacking the competence or conviction to challenge the institution’s status quo.

Rather than selecting the most qualified or visionary applicants—particularly highly credentialed African-Americans with civil rights expertise—the university often handpicked candidates who posed no challenge to its entrenched power structures. These corrupt practices not only undermine equity, but they also violate the spirit of constitutional and civil rights protections.

Alarmingly, formal complaints and calls for accountability regarding these discriminatory hiring practices have been ignored by key oversight authorities, including the Rhode Island Attorney General, the U.S. Attorney Zachary Cunha for Rhode Island Peter Neronha, and the FBI in Boston—all of whom were appointed under Democratic administrations. This raises serious concerns about partisan bias and the failure of state and federal agencies to protect civil rights in blue-state institutions that project a public image of diversity while perpetuating systemic exclusion behind closed doors.

URI’s All-White Criminal Justice Department

The University of Rhode Island’s Criminal Justice Department—at a public institution funded by taxpayers—has historically hired only white professors, raising serious concerns about racial bias and exclusion. Many of those hired lacked deep subject matter expertise, and the department’s hiring practices appear to have systematically excluded highly qualified Black candidates.

Particularly troubling is the pattern of excluding African-American applicants with ancestral lineage to slavery, who, despite being more experienced and academically accomplished than their white peers, were routinely eliminated before reaching final-round interviews. This exclusion reflects not only institutional bias, but a deeper disregard for the constitutional and civil rights principles the field of criminal justice is meant to uphold.

African-Americans Lead Criminal Justice Policy—But Are Excluded from URI

African-Americans have long been at the forefront of criminal justice advocacy in the United States. Intellectual activists, scholars, and legal experts across the country are leading reforms and shaping national conversations on policing, sentencing, and incarceration. Given this reality, the complete exclusion of Black and Latino faculty from the University of Rhode Island’s Criminal Justice Department—and their underrepresentation in university leadership—is deeply troubling.

Blacks make up 13.6% of the U.S. population, and the University of Rhode Island brands itself as a flagship public institution. In Rhode Island—a state governed exclusively by Democrats—Black residents represent 29.3% of the incarcerated population at the Adult Correctional Institutions (ACIs), despite being just a fraction of the overall population.

Even more disturbing is the fact that incarcerated Black and Brown individuals are paid less than $3 per day to manufacture furniture for URI dorms and offices. (Schiff, Pam. “Correctional Industries Prepares Inmates for Jobs.” Cranston Herald, Dec. 4, 2014). This arrangement raises grave ethical questions: Why are those most harmed by the criminal justice system being economically exploited to furnish institutions that systematically deny them seats at the table—both literally and figuratively?

A 2020 report commissioned by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and conducted by Harvard Law School found that systemic racism—not criminal behavior—was the primary driver behind the over-policing, over-charging, and over-incarceration of people of color. Rhode Island mirrors these racial disparities, yet the institutions benefiting from the system, including URI, have failed to address the glaring contradiction between their public values and their practices.

The immorality of a university benefiting from the labor of incarcerated youth of color—while denying their communities access to faculty and leadership roles—exposes a deeply entrenched hypocrisy. It’s not just unjust; it’s a continuation of structural racism wrapped in the language of liberal progressivism.