Tag: controversial

The U.S. Department of Education on Wednesday stepped back from its attempts to enforce a controversial and sweeping anti-DEI Dear Colleague letter issued nearly a year ago. In that policy letter, the Education Department said some race-based equity programs at colleges and schools discriminate against White and Asian students and could result in their federal funding being withdrawn. 

The Feb. 14 Dear Colleague letter cited the U.S. Supreme Court decision in SFFA v. Harvard — which banned race-conscious college admissions practices — as a reason to pare back other diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives in education.

“Such programs stigmatize students who belong to particular racial groups based on crude racial stereotypes,” the department’s letter said. “The Department will no longer tolerate the overt and covert racial discrimination that has become widespread in this Nation’s educational institutions. The law is clear: treating students differently on the basis of race to achieve nebulous goals such as diversity, racial balancing, social justice, or equity is illegal under controlling Supreme Court precedent.” 

On Wednesday, however, the Education Department signed a joint motion to dismiss an appeal in a lawsuit that would have allowed the agency to push forward with its anti-DEI policy. In abandoning its appeal, the agency signaled that it’s effectively stepping back from trying to enforce the policy. 

“In this case, with the stroke of a pen, the administration tried to take a hatchet to 60 years of civil rights laws that were meant to create educational opportunity” for all kids, said AFT President Randi Weingarten in a statement on Wednesday. AFT, one of the nation’s largest teachers unions, was the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit challenging the letter. “They attempted to rewrite and redefine opportunity to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion and threatened schools and districts with penalties if they failed to comply.” 

The U.S. Education Department of Education did not respond to multiple requests for comment in time for publication. 

In American Federation of Teachers v. U.S. Department of Education, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland’s Baltimore Division, Judge Stephanie Gallagher last August issued a preliminary injunction temporarily blocking the anti-DEI letter and a subsequent letter requiring school districts to certify that they do not incorporate DEI in their schools. 

Gallagher did not rule on the contents of the letters but said the manner in which the department changed its policies violated decision-making procedures required by the Administrative Procedure Act. 

The anti-DEI letter was also on hold because of rulings in at least two other lawsuits challenging the Education Department’s broader anti-DEI measures, including an anti-DEI complaint portal and the anti-DEI certification requirement for districts.

Those lawsuits are still pending. 

In the AFT case, the Education Department in October appealed the temporary block to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in an attempt to proceed with its anti-DEI measure. 

Now, however, its decision this week to abandon that appeal could impact a slew of Title VI investigations into universities that were based on the letter. 

In the Maryland district court’s preliminary injunction, Gallagher said the department specifically cited the letter in launching 51 Title VI investigations on March 14, 2025. After the letter was paused in earlier rulings, the department continued to launch investigations — based on legal interpretations barring DEI that were contained within the letter, but without explicitly citing it, according to Gallagher.

The department’s decision to abandon its appeal comes after it jettisoned its appeal in another case closely watched by the education community. 

In that case, the Trump administration on Jan. 2, without explanation, did an about-face and halted its efforts to push through layoffs affecting more than 400 Education Department staffers. The agency had originally appealed the court order requiring the agency to bring back the laid-off personnel.

The U.S. Department of Education on Wednesday stepped back from its attempts to enforce a controversial and sweeping anti-DEI Dear Colleague letter issued nearly a year ago. In that policy letter, the Education Department said some schools’ race-based equity programs discriminate against White and Asian students and could result in their federal funding being withdrawn. 

The Feb. 14 Dear Colleague letter cited the U.S. Supreme Court decision in SFFA v. Harvard — which banned race-conscious college admissions practices — as a reason to pare back other diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives in education.

“Such programs stigmatize students who belong to particular racial groups based on crude racial stereotypes,” the department’s letter said. “The Department will no longer tolerate the overt and covert racial discrimination that has become widespread in this Nation’s educational institutions. The law is clear: treating students differently on the basis of race to achieve nebulous goals such as diversity, racial balancing, social justice, or equity is illegal under controlling Supreme Court precedent.” 

On Wednesday, however, the Education Department signed a joint motion to dismiss an appeal in a lawsuit that would have allowed the agency to push forward with its anti-DEI policy. In abandoning its appeal, the agency signaled that it’s effectively stepping back from trying to enforce the policy. 

“In this case, with the stroke of a pen, the administration tried to take a hatchet to 60 years of civil rights laws that were meant to create educational opportunity” for all kids, said AFT President Randi Weingarten in a statement on Wednesday. AFT, one of the nation’s largest teachers unions, was the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit challenging the letter. “They attempted to rewrite and redefine opportunity to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion and threatened schools and districts with penalties if they failed to comply.” 

The U.S. Education Department of Education did not respond to multiple requests for comment in time for publication. 

In American Federation of Teachers v. U.S. Department of Education, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland’s Baltimore Division, Judge Stephanie Gallagher last August issued a preliminary injunction temporarily blocking the anti-DEI letter and a subsequent letter requiring school districts to certify that they do not incorporate DEI in their schools. 

Gallagher did not rule on the contents of the letters but said the manner in which the department changed its policies violated decision-making procedures required by the Administrative Procedure Act. 

The anti-DEI letter was also on hold because of rulings in at least two other lawsuits challenging the Education Department’s broader anti-DEI measures, including an anti-DEI complaint portal and the anti-DEI certification requirement for districts.

Those lawsuits are still pending. 

In the AFT case, the Education Department in October appealed the temporary block to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in an attempt to proceed with its anti-DEI measure. 

Now, however, its decision this week to abandon that appeal could impact a slew of Title VI investigations into universities that were based on the letter. 

In the Maryland district court’s preliminary injunction, Gallagher said the department specifically cited the letter in launching 51 Title VI investigations on March 14, 2025. After the letter was paused in earlier rulings, the department continued to launch investigations — based on legal interpretations barring DEI that were contained within the letter, but without explicitly citing it, according to Gallagher.

The department’s decision to abandon its appeal comes after it jettisoned its appeal in another case closely watched by the education community. 

In that case, the Trump administration on Jan. 2, without explanation, did an about-face and halted its efforts to push through layoffs affecting more than 400 Education Department staffers. The agency had originally appealed the court order requiring the agency to bring back the laid-off personnel.