That just seems prejudiced to me, a projection of (perhaps justified) contempt for DeVos based on other things than what she said. I sure don’t find any case for it in your remarks (starting with your ridiculous false paraphrases in the original post, for example that she wants to do nothing about the problem).

As Harvard Law professor Jeannie Suk Gerson (one of the signatories of the Harvard Law professor’s letter re Harvard’s policy) says here:

“In short, DeVos appears to be proceeding exactly as an agency head should: give notice, take comments, and explain why a given policy is being adopted. But the intent to depart from an Obama-era policy, which itself did not go through those steps, will undoubtedly garner outrage and dismay. … If these statements were made by a different official in a different Administration, they would seem rational, uncontroversial, and even banal. The idea that an adjudicatory process should be fair to both sides is about as basic as any facet of American law can be …”