Judicial panel, comprising two appointees of President Trump, overturns Department of Education's Policy against Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
Trump's crusade against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs experienced a significant setback yesterday with three federal judges, including two appointed by Trump himself, ruling against the Department of Education's attempt to withhold funding for schools involved in DEI or that incorporate race in specific ways.
This legal pushback started with a controversial "Dear Colleague" letter sent to schools in February, which outlined policy certification mandates that schools receiving federal funding would have to follow, including providing information about their compliance with the Trump administration's prohibitions.
In her scathing opinion, Judge Landya McCafferty, a Barack Obama appointee sitting in New Hampshire, declared the administration's policy as "textbook viewpoint discrimination," potentially infringing on First Amendment free speech protections. She also concluded, along with another judge, US District Judge Dabney Friedrich, a Trump appointee, that the policy was likely unconstitutionally vague.
Furthermore, McCafferty stated that the educators now face a challenging choice, having to choose between teaching curricula that potentially invite federal penalty or risking their professional credentials by supporting the Trump policy. She argued that the Constitution demands more.
Judge Dabney Friedrich, a Trump appointee, also found that the letter failed to distinguish between lawful DEI practices and unlawful ones, making the task of reviewing compliance too difficult.
A third ruling against the policy came from Judge Stephanie Gallagher, a Trump appointee in Baltimore. Gallagher found that the "Dear Colleague" letter ran afoul of procedural requirements for implementing new agency policy.
In sum, these judges' rulings suggest that the administration overstepped its authority, possibly infringing on First Amendment rights, and demonstrated vagueness in policy implementation. These rulings have and will likely continue to hamper Trump's efforts to restrict DEI programs in K-12 schools.
This development follows a short-term agreement between the Trump administration and the challengers in the New Hampshire case, which paused enforcement of the policy while the judge considered whether to issue a preliminary injunction. However, this agreement has now expired.
Ever since the start of Trump's second term, he has been at odds with DEI efforts. He has taken several measures against elite universities, demanding changes to their DEI programs. Already, the administration has rolled back DEI programs, arrested international students, and revoked their visas, and even frozen federal funding for schools that refused to comply with its demands.
It's important to note that the policy changes demanded are not limited to universities; for example, Columbia University made announced changes in response to demands from the Trump administration. Meanwhile, Harvard University sued the federal government over the administration's freezing of over $2 billion in multi-year grants and contracts after its leaders refused to make the Key policy changes, including eliminating DEI programs.
The NAACP, which filed the case in DC's federal court, hailed Friedrich's ruling as a victory for Black and Brown students nationwide. They argue that this administration's actions have directly threatened the right to an equal education. Similarly, Democracy Forward, a group representing the teachers' associations and public school district that sued over the policy in Baltimore, celebrated the ruling.
This story is still developing, with further updates expected.
CNN's Sunlen Serfaty and Emily R. Condon contributed to this report.
Key Enrichment Insights:- Legal Challenges: The American Civil Liberties Union and National Education Association led lawsuits arguing Trump's policy would harm schools and students by withholding federal funds if DEI programs continued.[1][3]- Civil Rights Law Concerns: Critics warn that downsizing the DOE and shifting enforcement authority could complicate future policy reversals.[2]- Previous Policy Changes: The Trump administration has targeted universities, frozen federal funding, arrested international students, and even revoked visas in response to schools refusing to comply with DEI demands.[3]
- McCafferty, a federal judge, deemed Trump's policy on DEI programs as "textbook viewpoint discrimination," suggesting potential infringement on First Amendment free speech protections.
- The general news about the ongoing legal battle reveals that Judge Dabney Friedrich, another federal judge, found the policy to be unconstitutionally vague and failing to distinguish between lawful and unlawful DEI practices.
- In a similar ruling, Judge Stephanie Gallagher, also a federal judge appointed by Trump, found that the policy ran afoul of procedural requirements for implementing new agency policy.
- The NAACP, in the context of this development, hailed Dabney Friedrich's ruling as a victory for Black and Brown students nationwide, arguing that the Trump administration's policies have threatened the right to an equal education.
