A federal district court judge in Missouri has blocked implementation of the Biden administration’s new Title IX rule in six additional states — Arkansas, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota.

The , ordered late Wednesday, brings to 21 the total number of states where the U.S. Department of Education can’t enforce the rule on Aug. 1.

Judge Rodney W. Sippel, a Clinton nominee, said the plaintiffs have a “fair chance” of demonstrating that the department “exceeded its statutory authority” by using the Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County to expand Title IX protections to LGBTQ students. 

Ravina Nath, a recent graduate of Gunn High School in Palo Alto, California, originally included Rice University in Houston on her short list of colleges to attend this fall. With an interest in neuroscience, she was drawn to its top-ranked biomedical engineering program. 

That was before Texas became one of to sue the U.S. Department of Education  over its new Title IX rule. The regulation extends protections against discrimination and harassment to LGBTQ students and requires prompt investigations into students’ complaints.

Instead, she’ll attend Barnard College in New York City.

“I need to be in a place where I would feel like my school supported me,” said Nath, who became a in high school. At Rice, some students to how officials handled complaints of sexual misconduct. And she ruled out the University of Georgia, a “potential safety school,” because it to make data on such investigations public. Several of her friends made similar calculations when narrowing down school choices. 

“My friends who are survivors and who are LGBTQ+ students applied to schools on the West Coast or the Northeast,” she said. “I don’t think any of my friends applied to school in .”

With the new rule set to go into effect Aug. 1 — just seven days away — a flurry of lawsuits has once again turned the map of the United States into a familiar patchwork of red and blue.

District courts have blocked the regulation in 15 Republican-led states. In the most recent development, the on Monday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to allow all but related to gender identity issues to go into effect in 10 of those states after two appellate courts denied earlier requests. 

Complicating the legal math further, in an earlier action, a federal judge in Kansas the rule just at serving children of current and future members of the conservative Moms for Liberty and students involved in , another advocacy organization opposed to trans girls competing on teams consistent with their gender identity. Moms for Liberty sees the ruling as an expansion opportunity: On Tuesday, the group tied to Title IX.

With the legal landscape changing daily, some experts think the Education Department should take a step back and delay the rule.

“For schools, universities and students, it’ll calm things down,” said Sandra Hodgin, who runs a Title IX consulting firm in Los Angeles. “What are we talking about, 75% of the country not implementing Title IX and only 25% of the country implementing it?”

A spokesperson said the department has no plans to skirt the Aug. 1 deadline. On Tuesday, it sent schools a list of “” and a on how to draft policies to comply.   

For now, the Supreme Court is considering whether to lift the temporary pause on the rule in the affected states.

The far larger question is what the justices might decide if and when they consider the substance of the rule itself. In addition to expanding protections to LGBTQ students, the new rule largely replaced one issued under former Education Secretary Betsy DeVos. That regulation narrowed the definition of sexual misconduct and required live hearings so male students could face their accusers. 

W. Scott Lewis, managing partner with TNG Consulting, which trains districts across the country on Title IX, has advised red states covered by an injunction, like Wyoming and Idaho, that they’re currently bound by the 2020 regulation.

But that could change quickly. 

“It’s a race to the Supreme Court right now,” he said.

‘Bigger than sports’

Some families with LGBTQ students aren’t waiting for the legal drama to run its course. They’ve already to escape laws that bar trans students from using bathrooms or playing on sports teams consistent with their gender identity. Several have moved to the Denver metro area, where Lewis lives, to attend schools in a state that is not challenging the rule.

“We have more than a handful of students at my kid’s high school who moved here from Wyoming, from Kansas, from Iowa,” he said. 

Most of the controversy surrounding Title IX focuses on trans students’ participation in sports, a part of the rule that the U.S. Department of Education has delayed addressing until after the election. But in Lewis’s estimation, that issue is “bigger than sports.” 

“If I’m in a state that won’t let me compete, I’m probably not in a state that’s very friendly to LGBTQ students on the whole,” he said. “I’m far more likely to just move on.”

In blue states set to implement the new rule, many conservative parents say their children’s rights are also at stake. 

They’re concerned students would be disciplined for not using LGBTQ kids’ preferred pronouns, forced to censor their speech or share bathrooms and locker rooms with trans students.

Hillary Hickland, a mother of four in central Texas, moved her children out of the Belton Independent School District partly because she felt there was too much emphasis on students’ gender identity. Her sixth grade daughter told her that teachers encouraged a friend to identify as a boy and use a boy’s name without the parents’ knowledge. 

“Don’t do it behind the backs of the parents. That’s a huge violation of trust,” she said. As a Republican running for the Texas House, she’s concerned about sexual orientation and gender identity becoming part of Title IX. “We have the federal government dictating what goes on in our local public schools. It really undermines the neighborhood school and that culture that we’re trying to preserve.”

‘Nine months behind’

Lewis predicts the Supreme Court will eventually follow its precedent in , which said that at least in the workplace, LGBTQ employees are protected from discrimination. The Biden administration’s new rule rests on that decision.

, who wrote that majority opinion, “can’t undo Bostock. He said sex means LGBTQ rights,” Lewis said. In red states where the rule is on hold, districts “better be ready to implement very quickly because [they’re] going to be nine months behind everyone else.”

If the court also decides to address sports participation — an expected part of the regulation the administration has yet to issue — Lewis said it’s possible the justices would rule similar to the way they handled , leaving it to the states to determine when trans students can compete on teams consistent with their gender identity. 

He called that a “nightmare scenario” because it would “create a world where athletes could compete in some states but not others.” And at the college, NCAA level, “there will be all sorts of questions that can’t be limited to state borders,” said Joshua Dunn, executive director of the Institute of American Civics at University of Tennessee, Knoxville. “They’ll have to address that, too.”

Dunn also suggested the conservative court might not follow Bostock and could treat LGBTQ issues differently at school than they do in the workplace. He noted cases, like , where the court put limits on students’ First Amendment rights in schools “that it would never allow outside of K-12 education.” 

Overturning ‘Chevron’

Another recent Supreme Court decision, unrelated to education, adds an additional layer of uncertainty to the debate over Title IX’s future — one that could affect both sides. 

In , the court overturned what was known as “Chevron deference,” which gave federal agencies broad authority to interpret ambiguous laws through guidance and regulations. The decision gives federal courts more power to explain the law when it’s unclear, and experts say, should end “.”

The Obama administration first issued a in 2011 stating schools’ obligations to protect students from sexual violence and harassment, which the Trump administration largely reversed in 2020, followed by yet another 180 in the spring by Biden’s education department.

Republicans have Education Secretary Miguel Cardona that they will review the department’s rules since President Joe Biden took office,  including Title IX. GOP leaders call the rule “overreach.” 

The conservative Heritage Foundation’s , largely assumed to be a legislative blueprint for a second Trump term,would remove the terms sexual orientation and gender identity from “every federal rule, agency regulation, contract, grant, regulation and piece of legislation that exists.”

But if Trump tries to reinstate the DeVos rule, Democrats could use Loper Bright to bring the same challenge, Lewis said.

“If you … say the department does not have the authority, then the 2020 regulations don’t count either,” he said. “It was exactly the same procedure.” 

A Texas federal judge blocked the Biden administration’s efforts to extend federal anti-discrimination protections to LGBTQ+ students.

In his ruling Tuesday, Judge Reed O’Connor said the Biden administration lacked the authority to make the changes and accused it of pushing “an agenda wholly divorced from the text, structure, and contemporary context of Title IX.” Title IX is the 1972 law that prohibits discrimination based on sex in educational settings.

“To allow [the Biden administration’s] unlawful action to stand would be to functionally rewrite Title IX in a way that shockingly transforms American education and usurps a major question from Congress,” wrote O’Connor, a President George W. Bush appointee. “That is not how our democratic system functions.”

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

The Biden administration’s new guidelines, issued in April, expanded Title IX to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. The changes would make schools and universities responsible for investigating a wider range of discrimination complaints. The rule changes came as several states, including Texas, have approved laws in recent years barring transgender student-athletes from participating in sports teams that correspond to their gender identity. The Biden administration hasn’t clarified whether the new guidance would apply in those cases.

Texas and several other states have the Biden administration over the new rule. . A month after the guidelines were released, Gov. called on school districts and universities .

“Threatening to withhold education funding by forcing states to accept ‘transgender’ policies that put women in danger was plainly illegal,” said Texas Attorney General in a statement applauding Tuesday’s ruling. “Texas has prevailed on behalf of the entire Nation.”

An U.S. Education Department said in a statement it stands by its revised guidelines.

“Every student deserves the right to feel safe in school,” the statement reads.

This article originally appeared in at . The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at .

“These three strategies have one central goal — giving students more time and more support to succeed,” U.S. Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said Wednesday at a White House gathering to outline the president’s K-12 agenda. “We’ll use all the tools at our disposal to advance these three pillars.”

The event, featuring three governors and three state chiefs, highlighted successful efforts to spend pandemic relief funds on proven models, like to improve student attendance and the that now reaches 245 of the state’s 600 districts. The administration aims to make sure more states and districts are implementing effective programs.

But some feel there was scant attention to the role of families in such efforts. 

“Amidst all the happy talk, there was no mention that far too many families seem unconvinced that they need to send students to school regularly, or to engage in additional learning opportunities,” said Nat Malkus, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. The “supply side” of the equation — offering extra opportunities for learning — won’t make any difference if parents don’t see the value, he said.

Since the pandemic, researchers have documented a disconnect between parents and educators over pandemic learning loss. A University of Southern California study released in December documented what some have called an “urgency gap,” with parents expressing little alarm over long-term effects of school closures. 

Keri Rodrigues, president of the National Parents Union, said there are other reasons why students aren’t in class everyday or aren’t taking advantage of tutoring opportunities. Schools, she said, aren’t giving students enough reasons to be there.

“Kids are watching movies and listening to people read books on YouTube in the classroom,” she said. And studies conducted in the wake of the pandemic show schools are requiring less effort from students. “Grade inflation will get you a C without even showing up.” 

An analysis of federal data from Attendance Works and the Everyone Graduates Center at Johns Hopkins University shows that roughly 14 million students were chronically absent during the 2021-22 school year, with significant increases among Latino students and those in suburban and rural districts. 

The administration hopes to reverse those trends by encouraging more states to regularly track chronic absenteeism and plans to publish examples from districts using strategies such as text messages and home visits. The White House urged more states to include chronic absenteeism as an indicator in their state accountability plans. Currently, 14 states don’t, according to the department.

Officials also outlined ways to use the department’s existing accountability structure under the federal Every Student Succeeds Act to push research-based tutoring programs. A growing points to models that connect students with the same tutor at least three times a week.

The department plans to monitor whether states with tutoring programs ensure that low-performing schools use high-dosage models. And the White House said states should to districts where test scores still trail pre-COVID performance.

“My guess is they have seen states sign contracts for large-scale online homework help, which isn’t evidence-driven,” said Kevin Huffman, CEO of Accelerate, which last year awarded $1 million each to five states to support high-dosage tutoring.

To Phillip Lovell, associate executive director at All4Ed, a nonprofit advocacy group, Biden’s agenda signals a shift from using federal relief funds effectively to ensuring successful programs continue to reach students in the lowest-performing schools. While the department is offering states the for an extension, the pandemic aid officially expires later this year. 

“The reality is that it is going to take much longer than the amount of time states and districts have to spend [relief] dollars to recover academically,” Lovell said. 

The it plans to run grant competitions supporting a long list of programs — not just tutoring, but also afterschool programs, and math and literacy coaching for teachers. But funding those programs is still up to Congress, which has not yet reached agreement on the budget for this fiscal year. 

Beyond monitoring districts’ use of Title I funds and promoting best practices, the administration was unclear about what other “tools” it might use to get districts to implement evidence-based programs. But some state leaders wish the department could do more to hold districts accountable. 

“I could use some help getting schools to really understand the value,” said New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grishamsaid, joining the event remotely. She said “far too many” districts in her state weren’t offering extended learning programs or high-dosage tutoring. “It has been harder than it ought to be to get everybody on the same page dedicated to improved outcomes and well-being for New Mexico students.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. House Democratic leaders on Wednesday called on Congress to pass President Joe Biden’s $16 billion supplemental child care funding request.

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Louisiana Illuminator maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Greg LaRose for questions: info@lailluminator.com. Follow Louisiana Illuminator on and .

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Republicans on Wednesday night failed to garner enough votes to block a new Biden administration rule on an income-driven repayment plan for federal student loans.

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arkansas Advocate maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sonny Albarado for questions: info@arkansasadvocate.com. Follow Arkansas Advocate on and .

First Lady Jill Biden, senior administration officials, school district heads and technology company executives will convene at the White House Monday to kick off a new cybersecurity defense initiative as schools increasingly fall victim to crippling ransomware attacks. 

The Education Department will launch a coordinating council to provide formal collaboration between government officials and district leaders to help schools strengthen their cybersecurity capabilities in the face of attacks that have closed campuses and exposed highly sensitive student and educator information online. The effort was announced by senior Biden administration officials on a press call Sunday evening. 

The council is being billed as the department’s “key first step” in a renewed focus on cybersecurity after multiple districts — including in Los Angeles and Minneapolis — were targeted by cyber gangs. 

At the White House event, federal officials will hear from school district leaders who navigated attacks, including Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent Alberto Carvalho, who led America’s second-largest school system through a hack last September. That breach, an investigation by The 74 revealed, exposed thousands of current and former students’ highly sensitive psychological evaluations on the dark web.

In addition to the first lady, others expected to attend the 4 p.m. White House summit include Education Secretary Miguel Cardona, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and Federal Communications Commission Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel. 

Anne Neuberger, the deputy national security advisor for cyber and emerging technologies, said the administration seeks to help school districts protect sensitive information about students, parents and educators. In March, a ransomware attack against Minneapolis Public Schools led to a data breach that exposed more than 189,000 files, including records related to sexual misconduct investigations, child abuse reports and district physical security information that’s typically kept private. 

Neuberger called the Minneapolis breach “a particularly vicious example,” citing the disclosure of closely held school security information, which was first revealed in an investigation by The 74. 

Teams of federal cybersecurity experts will visit schools and help them create incident response plans, said Neuberger, adding that districts — particularly small ones — often lack the money and resources to adequately prepare for attacks. 

Schools are now the single leading target for hackers, outpacing health care, technology, financial services and manufacturing industries, according to a global survey of IT professionals released last month by the British cybersecurity company Sophos.

Cindy Marten, the deputy secretary of education, said that government officials and school leaders must make school cybersecurity a priority at the same level as physical infrastructure. She said she experienced firsthand how districts and the federal government can work together to mitigate the harm from attacks. Carvalho reached out to the Education Department after the Los Angeles district was hacked, Marten said, making clear the importance of partnerships.

It can take as long as nine months for districts to recover from cyberattacks, , and can cost them as much as $1 million to respond. 

Several technology companies have also committed to offer schools “free and low-cost resources.” Amazon Web Services pledged to provide $20 million for a K-12 cyber grant program, free security training and incident response help. Meanwhile, will offer free cybersecurity tools to small districts with 2,500 or fewer students. 

Other federal commitments announced Monday include a guide from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Guard Bureau to help schools report cybersecurity incidents and tap into federal cyber defense expertise. 

Last month, the Federal Communications Commission proposed a $200 million grant program to help districts bolster cybersecurity. 

The Texas attorney general’s office filed a lawsuit Wednesday against the Biden administration over its interpretation of Title IX — which was expanded two years ago to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity — arguing that noncompliance puts Texas schools at risk of losing federal funding.

This lawsuit highlights an existing rift between Texas legislation and the 51-year-old federal civil rights law.

In 2021, the Biden administration said that Title IX, which protects people from sex-based discrimination in educational programs and activities, also applies to LGBTQ students.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

That same year, the Texas Legislature passed a law that bans transgender children in K-12 public schools from playing on sports teams that are aligned with their gender.

State law prohibits schools from following the Biden administration’s interpretation of Title IX, which the attorney general’s office said could put districts at risk of losing federal funding. During this year’s legislative session, Texas lawmakers passed , which expanded the existing restriction on transgender students to include athletics at the . And on Wednesday, Gov. announced he would sign what he’s calling the “Save Women’s Sports Bill” this week.

“Texas is challenging this blatant attempt to misuse federal regulatory power to force K-12 schools, colleges, and universities in our state to accept and implement ‘transgender’ ideology — in violation of state law — by misusing the Title IX statute to threaten the withholding of federal education funds,” said a statement from the attorney general’s office announcing the lawsuit.

“The Administration’s unlawful guidance could put at risk over $6 billion in federal funding that supports Texas K-12 and higher education institutions.”

The lawsuit was filed by , who is serving as the interim attorney general. was suspended and faces an impeachment trial in the Texas Senate later this summer. Paxton had previously been critical of Biden’s expanded Title IX regulations.

In the 2020 case , the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Title VII of the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars employment discrimination on the basis of sex, applies to gay and transgender workers as well.

Subsequently, the Biden administration updated the Title IX regulations to comply with the Bostock ruling by prohibiting discrimination in educational activities and programs on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

In April, the Biden administration proposed an amendment that would prohibit blanket bans barring transgender students from participating on sports teams consistent with their gender identity. The amendment applies to K-12 schools, as well as universities.

“Trans kids deserve to be respected in schools. Kids having their pronouns respected is a basic human right that cis people take for granted. Does the AG really want to tell Texas children that some kids deserve their teacher’s respect and others do not?” Johnathan Gooch, communications director for the LGBTQ advocacy group Equality Texas, said in a statement to The Texas Tribune.

“When the Supreme Court ruled that trans rights are part of Title VII protections, they rightly saw that trans and gender expansive people are protected under federal civil rights laws,” he said.

The attorney general’s announcement noted that this was Texas’s 50th lawsuit against the Biden administration.

Disclosure: Equality Texas has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete .

This article originally appeared in  a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

Public charter schools may have lost some of the luster they enjoyed with centrist Democrats in Washington, D.C., a decade or two ago, but a top Biden administration education official this week sought to reassure the sector that it enjoys broad support on both sides of the aisle.

“I do not believe that the bottom has fallen out from under the bipartisan coalition for public charter schools,” said Roberto Rodriguez, assistant secretary for planning, evaluation, and policy development at the U.S. Department of Education. “I think if that were the case, you would see the funding completely deteriorating from this program. And in fact, you’re not seeing that.”

The Biden administration has faced harsh criticism for its stance on its $440 million , a key federal grant that more than half of charter schools rely upon. This comes as centrist Democrats, once the sector’s biggest backers, have sought political support from teachers’ unions, which for decades have forcefully opposed charters.

During the 2020 presidential campaign, then-candidate Joe Biden admitted, “I’m not a charter school fan.”

But on Wednesday during a panel discussion at Washington, D.C.’s Brookings Institution, Rodriguez adopted a softer posture.

“We support high-quality public schools for all kids, including high-quality public charter schools,” he told Brookings Nonresident Senior Fellow Doug Harris, the panel’s moderator. “Our budget stands behind that. The work we’re doing stands behind that. The rulemaking that we’ve proposed is not an effort to tear down the charter school sector. In fact, it is an effort to further promote that objective.”

But the administration has warned that more than one in seven charter schools funded by the grant either never opened or shut down before their grant period ended, in effect wasting an in taxpayer funding. In response, last year it proposed new regulations that critics said amounted to a new “war” on charter schools.

The originally proposed rule for applicants required them to prove their schools met “unmet demand” in existing public schools — a requirement that charter advocates said ignored a bigger problem in district schools: poor quality.

The department also said applicants had to collaborate with “at least one traditional public school or traditional school district,” in effect giving districts a veto over their plans, according to charter advocates.

A third requirement said charter schools had to show they wouldn’t worsen district desegregation efforts or increase racial or socio-economic segregation or isolation in schools.

Taken together, , the draft requirements were “tailor-made to ensure that the most successful charter schools won’t be replicated or expanded.”

The education department received 26,550 comments on the proposed regulations, andangry charter school parents the White House in May to protest Biden’s stance on funding regulations.

eventually admitted that the final rules, issued in August, were less harmful but “not without impact” on future growth of the sector. Among the concerns: a shortened window for submitting applications.

Two groups , saying, among other things, that the department lacked authority to impose new criteria on the grants, which Congress approved as part of a massive spending bill in December. It level-funded the charter grant for the . 

Harris, who has long studied the sector, noted that recent campaign rhetoric “has been different from what the actions have been in the administration,” with more public-facing skepticism from lawmakers about charters than “what’s happening in the nuts and bolts of committee rooms.” He asked the panel if they see the coalition for charters “fracturing” on the ground, especially among centrist Democrats.

Shavar Jeffries, CEO of the KIPP Foundation, which trains educators for the network’s 280 schools, observed that even in the movement’s “halcyon heydays,” charters were simultaneously “contentious among a variety of different constituencies” and the beneficiaries of significant bipartisan support. That continues today, he said.

“I do think there’s a kind of false idea [that] people are moving away from the issue in ways that [are] maybe inconsistent with what we’ve seen in the past,” he said.

But Jeffries said opponents of the Biden regulations had a point about not wanting to collaborate with districts, since some district officials are “not interested in the practices we’re trying to share.” He added, “You can take a horse to water, but you can’t take it much further than that [if] people aren’t interested.”

In a few instances, Jeffries said, opponents “are actually acting aggressively to undermine the capacity for public charter schools to exist.” He recalled local superintendents who were not only opposed to KIPP practices, but “sadly, in some instances…didn’t even want us to be here. So the idea that we’re going to obtain their support is obviously not going to happen.”

He also said the requirement that charter schools not worsen segregation can, in some cases, amount to a requirement that schools serving Black and Latino students essentially find white students in the suburbs.

Charter schools serve more than 3 million students, recent research shows, about two-thirds of them Black or Hispanic and most low-income. 

The Brookings panel also included from another panelist, Katrina Bulkley of Montclair State University, who led a team that found charter school authorizers are a key but little-studied aspect of the charter school world.

While some authorizers say equity is key to their mission, they found, others focus on choice or “market logic.” And they found that authorizers that prioritized equity received applications from schools that also prioritized equity. “This really suggests to us that those beliefs and the practices of authorizers are shaping what applicants are submitting,” Bulkley said.

Correction: An earlier version of this story contained an incorrect funding amount for the federal Charter Schools Program.

The publication of the report from The Century Foundation, a progressive think tank, was timed to mark the 68th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education and demonstrates the degree to which the nation’s schools remain segregated by race long after it was legally outlawed. 

‘Pernicious’ segregation between school districts, not within them, is the primary reason for racial isolation in 280 out of the 403 metro areas, the report said. That is particularly true in the Northeast and Midwest, where counties often have multiple small school districts. Within-district segregation is greater in the South, which tends to have larger, countywide districts.

“The way that district lines are drawn has a huge impact on segregation and the resources that students in segregated districts have,” said lead author Halley Potter, a senior fellow at the progressive think tank.

Enrollment losses in urban public schools, exacerbated by the pandemic when many students left for private and charter schools, have likely contributed to further racial isolation in some communities, Potter said. But she chalked up the chief causes of segregation to migration, immigration and population growth. School attendance policies that keep students from enrolling in neighboring districts and white residents’ push to secede from majority minority districts are also contributing factors.

The Biden administration has proposed policies to address the issues, including a $100 million to support racial and socioeconomic diversity. Potter said states also have “carrots and sticks” to achieve more integrated schools.

For example, states can allow students to transfer across district lines. They also can design magnet schools to draw students from multiple districts. And they can require districts to take diversity into account when making boundary changes — a practice that only Arkansas and California have implemented.

“It’s a lot of work and coordination to get individual districts to come up with this on their own,” she said, adding that if more states prevented secessions and actively encouraged district mergers that promote integration, “that could be a powerful tool for tackling interdistrict segregation.”

The report complements recent research from Bellwether Education Partners that focused on “border barriers” — district boundaries that keep low-income families from enrolling their children in higher-quality schools.

The Foundation’s report features a first-of-its-kind interactive — developed by Ann Owens of the University of Southern California and Sean Reardon from Stanford University — that allows users to isolate metro areas and different types of segregation. The team developed a measure that ranges from 0, which means no segregation, to 1, which indicates students attend schools with no students from other races. 

Here are four takeaways from the data:

1 Milwaukee leads the pack

Overall, Black-white segregation is especially pronounced in 39 — or about 10% — of the nation’s 403 metro regions, including Milwaukee (.73), Newark (.71), Chicago (.70), Detroit (.70) and New York (.69). 

Hispanic-white segregation is greatest in Philadelphia and Reading, Pennsylvania, as well as Boston, Memphis and Los Angeles.

2 Economic segregation affects Black students the most

Economic segregation is also extreme in many metro areas, particularly Newark, Bridgeport, Milwaukee and Chicago, and affects Black students more than other groups. The average Black student attends a school where the rate of students who qualify for free or reduced-price meals is 16 percentage points higher than in the average white student’s school in the same metro region.

3 Private schools are not a leading factor

Private school enrollment is not a driving force behind segregation overall. But there are some areas where it’s a bigger factor, including Sumter, South Carolina, Napa, California, and the New York-Jersey City-White Plains area of New York and New Jersey. 

4 Research influenced White House on charters

Potter’s past influenced the Biden administration’s controversial proposal to revamp the federal Charter Schools Program. The plan would discourage the creation and expansion of charter schools in districts that have voluntary integration programs. 

The new report, however, shows that charter schools account for just 6% of segregation by income and 4% of white-nonwhite segregation across metro areas.