Federal Courts Block Education Department From Pulling Funds Over DEI
In three rulings, judges temporarily halted officials from taking action against states and districts over diversity, equity and inclusion efforts.
;)
Education news and commentary, delivered right to your inbox.
Sign up for The 74 newsletter.
Updated April 28
Adding to the legal challenges over the U.S. Department of Education鈥檚 efforts to rid schools of DEI, 19 Democrat-led states sued Friday over an April 3 鈥渄ear colleague鈥 letter.
The threat to withhold funding if states don鈥檛 sign what the complaint calls 鈥渁 novel and unlawful certification鈥 would be 鈥渃atastrophic for plaintiff states鈥 students from kindergarten through high school,鈥 the attorneys general wrote.
Collectively, the Democrat-led states stand to lose almost $14 billion, including Title I money for low-income schools and funds for students with disabilities. The complaint asks a federal district court in Massachusetts to declare the April 3 letter unlawful and prevent the department from taking any action based on its interpretation of anti-discrimination laws and the Supreme Court decision that ended racial preferences in college admissions.
States and school districts resisting a U.S. Department of Education ultimatum regarding diversity, equity and inclusion got a temporary reprieve Thursday. Two federal judges 鈥 one in and another in the 鈥 blocked the department鈥檚 ability to withhold federal funding from those that didn鈥檛 to its interpretation of non-discrimination laws or agree to end what officials called 鈥渋mpermissible鈥 DEI programs.
A third judge in suspended for now a Feb. 14 鈥溾 letter warning districts against racial diversity efforts. The deadline to sign a form certifying compliance was Thursday.
States and districts are 鈥渘o longer under the immediate threat鈥 of losing funds if they 鈥渃ontinue to offer long-standing lawful programs or don鈥檛 sign鈥 the form, said Katrina Feldkamp, assistant counsel at the Legal Defense Fund. Representing the NAACP, the law firm is among several groups, including unions, school districts and advocacy groups, involved in three separate lawsuits over the department鈥檚 anti-DEI guidance.
In a statement, Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers 鈥 part of the Maryland case 鈥 called the court鈥檚 ruling 鈥渁 huge win for students, families and educators.鈥
The department鈥檚 follow-up on Feb. 28 appeared to soften officials鈥 stance on practices it considers illegal, saying cultural and historical observances were acceptable as long as all students were welcome to participate. But the certification requirement took a firm tone, cautioning states that they could face substantial financial penalties if they sign it and are then found to be in violation.
鈥淭he court finds that threatening penalties under those legal provisions without sufficiently defining the conduct that might trigger liability violates the Fifth Amendment’s prohibition on vagueness,鈥 Judge Dabney Friedrich of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, said in her oral ruling granting a preliminary injunction. The department鈥檚 documents, she said, 鈥減laced a particular emphasis on certain DEI practices without providing an actual definition of what constitutes DEI or DEI practice.鈥
At the time of publication 12 states, including Arizona, Arkansas and Montana, and the District of Columbia, had signed the certification. Twenty-two, including California, Michigan and New Mexico, declined to sign, and 17 either hadn鈥檛 announced their decision or did not respond to calls or emails from The 74. Madi Biedermann, spokeswoman for the Education Department, said she didn鈥檛 know if officials would share the full count of states complying. She didn鈥檛 respond to a request for comment on the court rulings.
Signing the form indicates compliance with Title VI, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color and national origin, as well as the department鈥檚 view of a 2023 Supreme Court ruling against racial preferences in higher education admissions.
State chiefs who didn鈥檛 sign argued that the Education Department didn鈥檛 clearly define DEI and ignored proper procedures for collecting such information. Overall, the documents have left leaders bewildered over whether they stand to lose millions in federal funds. In Denver Public Schools, for example, roughly $36 million in Title I funds for high-poverty schools and another $20 million for special education services are at stake. Like state chiefs in several other blue states, Colorado鈥檚 Susana C贸rdova to sign the document.
鈥淚 think all districts across the country are forced to grapple with this question of 鈥榃hat would you do without it?鈥 鈥 said Chuck Carpenter, chief financial officer.
Title I funds in his district, Colorado鈥檚 largest, cover salaries for school social workers, help to reduce class sizes and support interventions for students who are behind academically.
鈥淭hese are very much on-the-ground expenses,鈥 he said. 鈥淭his doesn’t get caught up in the bureaucracy. This is for real kids and real people.鈥
Several GOP state chiefs welcomed the department鈥檚 message. Arizona state Superintendent Tom Horne , 鈥淭hank you for fighting for our Constitution and laws!鈥 along with his signature. Oklahoma chief Ryan Walters posted of himself at his desk signing the form.
鈥淣o DEI in Oklahoma schools,鈥 he said. 鈥淲e will talk about merit and American exceptionalism, and we’ll have the best school system possible, thanks to President Trump.鈥
While some state and district leaders likely viewed the form as a 鈥渂ox to check,鈥 others may see it as 鈥減rovocation,鈥 said Jackie Wernz, a civil rights attorney and consultant who worked in both the Obama and first Trump administrations.
鈥淭he department鈥檚 shifting guidance in recent months has created a lot of confusion in the field,鈥 she said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 not always clear whether this is a legal compliance issue or a political messaging moment.鈥
Even some critics of DEI agree. Steven Wilson, a senior fellow at the free market-oriented Pioneer Institute for Public Policy Research in Boston, argues that many schools, including high-performing charter networks, went astray by embracing anti-racist teaching approaches.
He pointed, for example, to author that 鈥渨orship of the written word鈥 is evidence of white supremacy and framing around social justice issues.
鈥淭hese teachings are enormously destructive,鈥 said Wilson, who founded the Ascend charter school network in Brooklyn, New York. 鈥淚 would be hard pressed to think of a more damaging message to impart to teachers of Black and brown children than that the worship of the written word is whiteness.鈥
But Wilson views the department鈥檚 threat to federal funding as equally harmful. 鈥淭he audacity鈥 of tying the compliance form to funding for programs that serve students in poverty and those with disabilities, he said 鈥渉as to be vigorously contested.鈥
鈥楬istorically underserved鈥
Title I, the biggest federal education program, totals over $18 billion. Part of the 1960s War on Poverty, it has 鈥渞eally been a cornerstone of federal funding in K-12 for the better part of a century,鈥 said Jess Gartner, founder of Allovue, a school finance technology company that鈥檚 now part of PowerSchool. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, currently funded at $15 billion, came a decade later in 1975.
Officials can鈥檛 withhold those funds with 鈥渁 wave of the hand and a strike of the pen鈥 or because 鈥渟omeone won鈥檛 sign a form,鈥 Gartner said. 鈥淭here is for reporting, investigating and determining that discrimination has actually occurred.鈥
In 2023, under former Education Secretary Miguel Cardona, the department withheld federal funds from Maine for not meeting state testing requirements. But that was after two years of being out of compliance, and officials the state could reserve for administrative costs 鈥 not the money that goes to schools.
The Trump administration has demonstrated that it will abruptly cancel funding that has already been approved by Congress. That鈥檚 why finance officers like Carpenter in Denver are on edge about how the department will respond to states that didn鈥檛 sign the form.
Title I funding supports about half of the Denver district鈥檚 207 schools, where immigrant and non-English-speaking parents especially rely on liaisons like Boni Sanchez Florez. He helps them access after-school classes, mental health services and low-cost internet. But Florez also encourages them to take leadership roles and speak up about issues that affect their children, like .
鈥淚t’s hard enough for them to walk in a building with a staff that is predominantly 80% white. How do you build that trust in a community that doesn’t trust the system?鈥 asked Florez, who moved to the U.S. from Mexico as a child. 鈥淚f I’m in my dad’s shoes 30 years ago, I would want people to reach out to me.鈥
Nearby in Jeffco Public Schools, Colorado鈥檚 second largest district, roughly 100 staff members are directly paid with Title I funds, said Tara Pe帽a, chief of family partnerships and community engagement. They include three 鈥渇amily ambassadors鈥 who work out of a mobile welcome center 鈥 a customized bus that hosts enrollment fairs, book giveaways and what Pe帽a called 鈥済oodwill events.鈥
The welcome center staff signs families up for Medicaid or free lunch programs and teams up with other community groups to distribute school and hygiene supplies.
鈥淎 loss in federal funding would be very destructive and be very impactful to the supports and the services that we provide to our most vulnerable students,鈥 Pe帽a said. 鈥淭he students who’ve been historically underserved would continue to be the ones that would be harmed.鈥
鈥楩our years?鈥
The potential cuts to funding also come as districts across the country are finalizing their budgets for the upcoming school year, with federal funds in mind. Before McMahon announced the certification requirement on April 3, most had already issued contracts for staff for this fall.
In California, which receives over $2 billion in Title I funds and almost $1.6 billion from IDEA, the deadline to issue any layoff notices was March 15.
That means districts would still be obligated to pay employees whose salaries come from those sources 鈥渨hether they get funding or don鈥檛,鈥 said Michael Fine, CEO of the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team, a state agency responsible for financial oversight of districts. 鈥淒istricts did not contemplate such a loss before the March 15 layoff window.鈥
Districts in Michigan, another state that declined to sign the form, are in the same predicament. For now, the Detroit Public Schools Community District 鈥 where roughly 25% of the budget comes from federal sources 鈥 has committed to not letting any employees go. But Jeremy Vidito, chief financial officer, said that could just be a temporary solution if the department fully cuts Title I.
“Maybe we can bridge two years with our fund balance. But four years? There’s no way,鈥 he said. 鈥淚t will mean school closures. It will mean reduced services for our kids and walking back the intervention programs.”
With a student poverty rate of more than 80%, the nearly $125 million Detroit receives in Title I funding pays for counselors, social workers, and art and music teachers, as well as high school administrators who are focused on keeping ninth graders on track for graduation.
For LaQuitta Brown鈥檚 son Kermari, a 7 year old with autism, art has been especially important. He struggled to speak until last year, but he could communicate with his mother by drawing pictures, Brown said. Through special education, he receives speech and occupational therapy. His mother also depends on a mobile vision screening program for his checkups.
鈥淗e wouldn’t be where he would be without those services,鈥 she said. 鈥淚t takes a village, especially when you have a child needing special attention.鈥
Title I also supports high-dosage tutoring in Detroit, one of the reasons, Vidito said, why the district outperformed most other large, urban systems in a from researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities. Last school year, the district also saw in reading than the state as a whole.
鈥淲e are seeing results,鈥 he said. 鈥淲e have committed to educating all kids, but if we start to defund education, then we’re stepping back from that commitment.鈥
Most right-leaning think tanks, like the Heritage Foundation, welcome the department鈥檚 certification requirement and its interpretation of the decision.
That opinion didn鈥檛 mention K-12 schools, but it has 鈥渂road implications for the use of racial preferences in public education services at the K-12 and postsecondary levels,鈥 said Jonathan Butcher, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation. 鈥淭he majority opinion and supporting opinions deal with rooting out racism writ large from education.鈥
But Wilson at the Pioneer Institute said the AFT lawsuit is 鈥渙ne of those relatively rare moments鈥 of agreement he has with AFT President Randi Weingarten. She said the anti-DEI directives would hamper schools鈥 efforts to teach accurate history, including the harms of slavery and persecution of minority groups.
鈥淚f that is what [the department] has in mind as a federal prohibition, that would be devastating.鈥 he said. Trump, is 鈥渃laiming, rather flamboyantly, to devolve education back to the states while announcing this unprecedented intrusion into what schools and districts may teach.鈥
The 74’s Mark Keierleber contributed to this story.
Did you use this article in your work?
We鈥檇 love to hear how The 74鈥檚 reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.
