; Whereas ideologically motivated and required DEI statement policies can too easily function as litmus tests for adherence to prevailing ideological views on DEI, penalize faculty or applicants for holding dissenting opinions on matters of public concern, and cast a pall of orthodoxy over the campus that the Supreme Court warned against in Keyishian; Whereas a survey by the American Association of University Professors of hundreds of colleges and universities found that more than one-fifth of higher education institutions include DEI criteria in tenure standards, and of the institutions that do not include such DEI criteria, nearly half indicated they are considering adding such criteria in the future; Whereas a survey by the American Enterprise Institute of academic job postings found that nearly 20 percent required DEI statements; Whereas the First Amendment to the Constitution prohibits public universities from compelling faculty to assent to specific ideological views or to embed those views in academic activities; Whereas in order to push favored views, colleges and universities are increasing the number of faculty dedicated to programs and initiatives to support these ideological views; Whereas the Heritage Foundation found that large public universities averaged 45 DEI personnel, while other departments in universities are understaffed by comparison, and this proliferation of DEI administrators and prioritization of DEI adherence in personnel decisions places importance on adherence to a social movement rather than on education and serving students; Whereas medical schools are also probing student applicants on their views on, or experience in, DEI efforts, and this overt test on identity politics for medical school admissions has been found in 36 of the top 50 medical schools; Whereas demanding that students endorse specific beliefs or face roadblocks in their education is an appalling action from professional schools and far from the meaning of academic freedom