After receiving significant public backlash, San Diego State University has tweaked the name of a course that it claims was never about removing President Trump from office.

According to The San Diego Union Tribune, the university announced Wednesday that the original course title--“Trump: Impeachment, Removal, or Conviction?”--was “inconsistent with the course content described,” and that the title will be revised to excise Trump’s name.

"In retrospect, we realize the title of the course, 'Trump: Impeachment, Removal, or Conviction?' is inconsistent with the course content described."

[RELATED: SDSU offers course on removing Trump from office]

“The course presents an overall framework of impeachment, removal, or criminal investigation of a president and rather than focusing on President Trump, reviews all 19 impeachments in U.S. history,” the university explained, adding that “the one-unit, weekend class is not a requirement for graduation and is not paid for by state funds.”

However, the university did not address the fact that the only required text for the course is Allan Lichtman’s The Case for Impeachment, which examines various ways that Trump, specifically, could potentially be removed from office.

Trump’s name has already been removed from the course title on the school’s online catalog, which now reads simply “Impeachment, Removal, or Conviction.”

[RELATED: Prof tries to keep anti-Trump course secret, fearing backlash]

The course description remains the same, however, stating that “focus will be on the two constitutional grounds: impeachment and removal (25th Amendment), and the possible charges of the independent counsel, the powers of the president,” and “a history of the creation of [the presidency] and the comparison of divine right and rule of law leadership.”

The curriculum will also address “grounds for impeachment, removal, or indictment,” such as “conflict of interests, foreign emoluments, climate change, racism, religious bias, improper influence, nepotism, and a host of crimes, including conspiracy, false statements, and obstruction of justice.”

Follow the author of this article on Twitter: @celinedryan