BOSTON – On Tuesday, a federal judge in Boston halted the Trump administration’s initiative to sever funding totaling hundreds of millions of dollars for teacher training. This decision came amid concerns that the funding cuts were already hindering training programs designed to address the widespread teacher shortage facing the nation.
U.S. District Judge Myong Joun ruled in favor of the eight states that sought a temporary restraining order. Those states contended that the proposed cuts were likely part of President Donald Trump’s administration’s attempts to do away with diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. Trump, a Republican, has expressed his desire to dismantle the Education Department. His administration has already begun its overhaul, terminating numerous contracts deemed “woke” and wasteful.
The defendants argued that the federal Education Department had abruptly canceled two key programs in February without providing prior notice—namely, the Teacher Quality Partnership and Supporting Effective Educator Development. These programs had been vital in channeling over $600 million in grants to teacher preparation programs, particularly in critical areas like mathematics, science, and special education. Evidence suggested these programs had notably improved teacher retention rates and helped educators remain in their profession beyond the five-year mark.
Judge Joun, nominated by President Joe Biden, a Democrat, determined that the cancellations breached administrative law because they lacked a transparent rationale. He noted that the states face the risk of sustained damage, as they have already begun scrapping teacher training programs, causing layoffs. “The record shows that if I were to deny the TRO, dozens of programs upon which public schools, public universities, students, teachers, and faculty rely will be gutted,” he wrote, referring to the temporary restraining order.
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell praised the order as “a victory for our students, teachers, and school districts, restoring funds to programs tailored to address the ongoing teacher shortage in the Commonwealth, including those serving vulnerable students with special needs.”
During Monday’s proceedings, Laura Faer, representing California plaintiffs, emphasized the need for a temporary restraining order, as the suspension of grants was already leading to layoffs and program shutdowns. “The situation is dire right now,” Faer claimed, informing the court of the looming threat of closure faced by programs statewide.
Alongside California, participating states included Massachusetts, New Jersey, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, New York, and Wisconsin. Adelaide Pagano, speaking on behalf of Massachusetts, argued that the Education Department overstepped its boundaries by canceling the grants without proper legislative support. She asserted that the cancellation letters sent to grantees lacked a clear and reasonable explanation and unjustly altered the criteria in the midst of the grant process.
On the government’s behalf, Michael Fitzgerald insisted that the Education Department retained the authority to revoke the grants, especially for programs suspected of breaching federal anti-discrimination laws and no longer aligning with the department’s agenda. He argued that immediate intervention was unnecessary since grantees could have their funds reinstated should they win the court case.
In response, the Trump administration filed an appeal late Tuesday with the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
