In a significant development, a federal judge obstructed the Trump administration’s initiatives threatening to revoke federal funding for educational institutions that maintained diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs. The order emerged following a lawsuit filed by the National Education Association along with the American Civil Liberties Union, which accused the administration of delivering “unconstitutionally vague” instructions and infringing upon teachers’ First Amendment rights.
Simultaneously, another judge in Maryland postponed the implementation date of some directives issued by the U.S. Department of Education that opposed DEI initiatives, while a third judge in Washington, D.C., halted a separate provision from going into effect.
Earlier this year, the Department of Education had instructed schools and colleges to cease practices distinguishing individuals based on race. More recently, states were mandated to gather verification from local school districts, certifying conformity with civil rights regulations, including the dismissal of so-called “illegal DEI practices” by the federal government.
While these directives lacked legal authority, they threatened to deploy civil rights enforcement to eliminate DEI initiatives from schools. Schools were cautioned that persisting with such practices “in violation of federal law” could trigger legal action from the U.S. Justice Department and lead to the cessation of federal funding and contracts.
U.S. District Court Judge Landya McCafferty in New Hampshire emphasized that a communications sent in April did not clearly explain what the department considered a DEI program or when such programs supposedly violated civil rights law. “The Letter does not even define what a ‘DEI program’ is,” Judge McCafferty articulated. Furthermore, the judge suggested that the department’s measures potentially violated educators’ free speech rights.
“A professor violates the 2025 Letter if they assert in their teaching that structural racism exists in America but does not if they refute the existence of structural racism. That is textbook viewpoint discrimination,” McCafferty elaborated. The Education Department didn’t respond immediately to requests for comments on the matter.
States had until the conclusion of Thursday to deliver certification of their schools’ compliance, though some states have shown reluctance to comply. Education authorities in several Democratic-led states argued the administration was exceeding its jurisdiction and maintained that DEI programs were not unlawful.
The directive from February 14, known formally as a “Dear Colleague” letter, alleged that schools advanced DEI initiatives at the detriment of white and Asian American students. It significantly broadened the application of a 2023 Supreme Court decision, which barred race consideration in college admissions, to encompass all aspects of education, such as hiring, promotions, scholarships, housing, commencement ceremonies, and campus life.
In Maryland, U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher postponed the February memo, acknowledging it was improperly issued and placed educators in a predicament between suppressing their speech or facing punitive measures for exercising their constitutional rights. This lawsuit was spearheaded by the American Federation of Teachers, a leading teachers’ union in the United States.
“The court concurred that this ambiguous and evidently unconstitutional requirement severely threatens students, our profession, transparent history, and knowledge itself,” stated Randi Weingarten, the AFT’s president, in a released statement.
Additionally, in Washington, D.C., a judge granted a preliminary injunction against the certification letter following arguments from the NAACP that it lacked identification of specific DEI practices that contravened the law. All three lawsuits claim that the issued guidance restricts academic freedom and creates ambiguity for schools and educators regarding allowable activities, such as the permissibility of voluntary student groups for minority students.
As part of the April directive, states were tasked with collecting the certification form from local school districts and signing it on the state’s behalf, guaranteeing adherence to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
President Donald Trump’s former education secretary, Linda McMahon, cautioned against potential funding cuts for non-compliance by states. In a conversational piece with Fox Business Network, McMahon indicated that states refusing to sign could “risk some defunding in their districts.” The essence of the form is “to ensure there’s no discrimination occurring in any of the schools,” she mentioned.
While schools and states are already obligated to provide such assurances in distinct paperwork, the new form incorporated language addressing DEI, cautioning that the utilization of diversity initiatives to discriminate could result in funding cuts, fines, and other penalties. This form risks schools losing access to Title I funding, the largest source of federal revenue for K-12 education, which is crucial for schools in low-income areas.