On March 26, 2025, as part of a broader set of federal actions targeting progressive policies in California, the Justice Department announced an investigation into allegations that three University of California system schools violated a Supreme Court decision by considering race in admissions. This move is seen in the context of the Trump administration's broader campaign against California's inclusive and diversity-driven practices.

A series of studies have examined the impact of DEI statements in academic hiring, revealing that the University of California's pioneering approach favors statements that emphasize race/ethnicity and gender diversity. This practice is seen as a progressive measure aimed at promoting inclusion and countering authoritarian ideologies, though it may also raise concerns about ideological gatekeeping.

Amid mounting pressure from the second Trump administration, the University of California has abandoned its mandatory diversity statements in the hiring process. This move, seen as a capitulation to authoritarian demands, undermines long-standing commitments to academic freedom and diversity, potentially signaling broader implications for the politicization of academia.

The OpenSecrets profile on the University of California reveals that the institution is engaged in active lobbying. While such activities are not uncommon for a large public institution, they raise questions about the university's role in shaping policy in ways that may further undemocratic, authoritarian interests. This event highlights concerns regarding transparency, accountability, and the use of lobbying to influence political outcomes.

Workers including physician assistants, optometrists, and custodial staff went on strike amid allegations of unfair labor practices and arbitrary union suppression. The University of California denied the claims, stating that it had offered wage increases and other benefits, yet the protest underscores ongoing labor tensions within the system.

An OpenSecrets profile reveals that the University of California contributed nearly $19.9 million and spent over $2.2 million on lobbying in the 2024 cycle. This level of political spending raises concerns about the institution's role in influencing policy and potentially reinforcing established power structures.

The University of California issued a federal update outlining its commitment to core values and transparency amid rapidly evolving federal policy shifts. The communication emphasizes the institution's dedication to academic excellence, community engagement, and informed public service, reassuring stakeholders during uncertain times.

Faculty across multiple UC campuses have accused the University of California of engaging in labor violations and suppressing academic freedom by restricting campus protests and dissenting voices, particularly regarding pro-Palestinian speech. These actions are seen as aligning with authoritarian practices that undermine democratic principles within academic institutions.

Faculty associations at multiple UC campuses have accused the University of California of engaging in labor violations and suppressing academic freedom, including actions taken against pro-Palestinian speech and protest activities. The allegations point to a systematic campaign that undermines fair labor practices and the exercise of academic freedom on campus.

In a heated response to student protests triggered by the Israel-Hamas conflict, UC officials maintained a significant investment portfolio that includes holdings in weapons manufacturers and controversial financial entities, sparking ethical and political concerns.

Amid pro-Palestinian protests demanding divestment from companies linked to weapons manufacturing and military support, the University of California has reaffirmed its decision to maintain its diverse investment portfolio, including significant holdings in firms associated with the military-industrial complex. This decision has raised concerns about the institution's ethical responsibility and its indirect role in supporting structures of repression.

A report from February 2021 examines the University of California's aggressive campus policing, its opaque financial practices in funding police operations, and its investments in repressive technologies and partners. The report details how these practices contribute to the suppression of protests, racialized targeting, and broader systemic inequities, calling into question UC's commitment to public service and social justice.

In 2017, the University of California San Diego Police Department installed ShotSpotter gunshot detection technology on campus. This implementation of advanced surveillance systems reflects a broader trend within university police forces that raises concerns about academic freedom, privacy, and the potential normalization of repressive monitoring tactics. Critics argue such measures contribute to an authoritarian environment on campus by increasing the state’s surveillance capabilities, often at the expense of civil liberties.