James J. Condon, who goes by Jim, is the former Emeritus Astronomer at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO). “Former” because on November 1, 2022, he was unceremoniously ousted from that position, informed by a tersely worded letter from Adam Cohen, President and CEO of Associated Universities Inc (AUI), which manages the NRAO. Before his retirement, Condon had built a distinguished career in radio astronomy, evidenced by his nearly 400 publications on galaxies, black holes, and sundry phenomena of our turbulent universe.

Condon tells his own story in his May 13, 2026, article in Minding the Campus titled “VICTORY: Astronomer Wins Six Figures in Retaliation Case After Opposing DEI.” You get the idea. Instead of apologizing, he sued—and won.

Three days after the essay appeared, I interviewed Condon about his experience in a video titled “Fighting the DEI Regime in Astronomy.” Condon speaks eloquently for himself, so I won’t recount the full story here. Suffice it to say that both the article and interview are worth reading and watching. What follows is my impression of our conversation.

First is the exposure of the utterly Kafkaesque nature of the “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) regime, which is built on a fundamental logical incoherency.

The NRAO and its supporting organizations have stated policies of non-discrimination, in accordance with federal civil rights law. Yet the NRAO and its supporting organizations explicitly engage in discrimination in pursuit of DEI goals. The NRAO does not seek to resolve this incoherency but instead doubles down, arguing that because recruitment was not discriminatory, but only hiring, the DEI program itself was not discriminatory. When that risible logic failed, the administrations of the NRAO and its supporting organizations resorted to forced conformity, requiring staff to sign declarations of loyalty to DEI goals—a point made clear in the email exchanges reproduced in Jim’s “VICTORY” essay. When Condon refused to sign the DEI loyalty oath, his fate was sealed: so much for principled dissent. In the eyes of the NRAO administration, Condon was an employee who could be fired for insubordination, just like a groundskeeper could be: only the process differed.

Second, Condon’s dissent was far more respectful than the administrative response to it.

For several years, Condon had been raising the issue behind the scenes. His communications were kept private, and he never sought to publicly shame anyone in the NRAO administration or scientific staff. He did not engage in ad hominem critiques of his correspondents, only asking them to address an unresolvable inconsistency. The same cannot be said for his correspondents, who engaged in behind-the-scenes derision of Condon and his motives, culminating in a conspiratorial plot to oust him. This violated federal civil rights law prohibiting retaliation against employees who disagreed with the policy. It was on those grounds that Condon brought suit, which the NRAO and AUI settled with the civil equivalent of nolo contendere.

Third, Condon’s story underscores just how entrenched and resistant to change the DEI regime is in the sciences.

The people who perpetrated the cancellation campaign against Condon are still in their positions, having suffered no consequences, nor will they, for their disgraceful conduct. Nor does Condon give himself any credit for bringing about change in the DEI regime at the NRAO. What change has come about, Condon credits to the change in administrations in Washington, not to any fundamental determination to reform or resolve the incoherencies of the DEI regime at the NRAO.

Which leads to my final impression: that racial discrimination at the NRAO, and throughout science for that matter, has merely hunkered down and is ready to spring back strong as ever as soon as the political winds shift back in their favor.

That should make us all pause for thought.

Follow J. Scott Turner on X.

Watch the interview below or on YouTube: