Federal judge in NH blocks Trump administration's threats over DEI in schools
Judge Landya McCafferty issued a preliminary injunction Thursday blocking the U.S. Department of Education, led by Secretary Linda McMahon, from enforcing numerous threats made to American public schools since the start of President Donald Trump's second term.
The order states the U.S. Department of Education cannot enforce a February 'Dear Colleague' letter and an April federal civil rights compliance certification form, which both threaten federal funding being removed from public schools. McCafferty's order also blocks the U.S. Department of Education from taking action against any school district at the heart of any complaint made via the agency's 'End DEI' online portal, which encourages reports about 'illegal discriminatory practices at institutions of learning,' according to the website.
McCafferty wrote Thursday the defendant cannot enforce any action against 'the plaintiffs, their members, and any entity that employs, contracts with, or works with one or more plaintiffs or one or more of plaintiffs' members.'
"The ban on DEI embodied in the 2025 ('Dear Colleague') Letter leaves teachers with a Hobson's choice," McCafferty wrote Thursday. "If they fail to abide by the ill-defined standards set forth in the letter, they leave themselves open to (1) their school's decision to terminate their employment or curb their work in order to preserve essential federal funding, (2) public ostracization based on one person's view of what 'DEI' is, or (3) potential disciplinary proceedings that put their license at risk. But even if they endeavor to abide by the 2025 Letter's requirements, they risk failing to comply with certification requirements necessary for retention of their professional credentials. All while not being afforded a reasonable opportunity to know what the 2025 Letter even requires of them. The Constitution requires more."
The Trump administration's crusade against DEI programming in American public schools took center stage in New Hampshire, as the National Education Association and the American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education. The Center for Black Educator Development is another co-plaintiff, and three local school districts - the Dover, Oyster River and Somersworth school systems - make up another small group planning to sign on to the lawsuit.
A hearing on the three plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction was held at the Warren G. Rudman U.S. Courthouse Concord on Thursday, April 17. Their entire request for injunction was granted Thursday with McCafferty's order.
"This injunction shall take effect immediately and shall remain in effect pending further order of this court," her order adds.
Sarah Hinger, a national ACLU attorney and deputy director of its Racial Justice Program, led the plaintiffs' arguments last week.
She and Gilles Bissonnette, the legal director for the ACLU of New Hampshire, called McCafferty's ruling a victory for "academic freedom" in the United States.
"Every student deserves an education that reflects the full diversity of our society, free from political interference,' Hinger said in a prepared statement. 'The federal government has no authority to dictate what schools can and cannot teach to serve its own agenda, and this ruling is an important step in reaffirming that.'
"Every student, both in the Granite State and across the country, deserves to feel seen, heard, and connected in school - and that can't happen when classroom censorship laws and policies are allowed to stand," Bissonnette added in his own prepared statement.
U.S. Department of Education attorney Abhishek Kambli indicated in the Concord courthouse last week the agency would appeal if McCafferty ruled in favor of the plaintiffs.
Over 160 New Hampshire public school districts — including all of SAU 50 (comprising Greenland, New Castle, Newington and Rye students) and the Hampton and Seabrook districts — all signed and submitted the certification form due Thursday, per the New Hampshire Department of Education's compliance tracker. There were several holdouts, including the Dover, Oyster River and Somersworth school districts.
More: Exeter area SAU 16 board votes to sign DEI compliance order. Here's why.
The New Hampshire Department of Education required all state public school districts to fill out the form by last Thursday, April 17, though the U.S. Department of Education's deadline was set for Thursday.
The Exeter area SAU 16 Joint Board voted Monday to authorize Superintendent Esther Asbell to sign the federal compliance form, believing it is in compliance already. SAU 16 represents students from the Brentwood, East Kingston, Exeter, Kensington, Newfields and Stratham school districts, in addition to the Exeter Region Cooperative School District.
The Portsmouth school district submitted the certification this month but rescinded it days later. SAU 52 intended to join the federal lawsuit alongside other area school districts but has dropped the plan for now.
Susan Morrell, Portsmouth's city attorney, briefed the City Council on the matter Monday evening.
'The city will continue to follow this lawsuit carefully and take its own actions in regard to the certification letters that are being demanded,' Morrell said. 'If there is an injunction, we believe that we'll be protected under that umbrella, as well, even though we're not part of that lawsuit.'
(This story has been updated with new information.)
This article originally appeared on Portsmouth Herald: Judge in NH blocks Trump administration's threats over DEI in schools
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Atlantic
26 minutes ago
- Atlantic
Trump Leaves Alaska Empty-Handed
So what was that all for? President Donald Trump emerged today from his summit with Russia's Vladimir Putin without a deal and without much to say. Trump rarely misses a chance to take advantage of a global stage. But when he stood next to Putin at the conclusion of their three-hour meeting, Trump offered few details about what the men had discussed. Stunningly, for a president who loves a press conference, he took no questions from the reporters assembled at a military base in Alaska. In his brief remarks, Trump conceded that he and Putin had not reached a deal to end the war in Ukraine or even pause the fighting. 'There's no deal until there's a deal,' the president said. He characterized their three-hour meeting—vaguely—as 'very productive.' Of the outstanding issues between the two sides, he admitted that 'one is probably significant,' but he didn't say what that was. 'We didn't get there but we have a very good chance of getting there,' Trump insisted. The Russian president, for his part, made mention of 'agreements' that had been struck behind closed doors. Yet Putin also provided no elaboration, leaving the distinct impression that it was a summit about nothing. If anything, Putin seemed to make clear that his demands regarding Ukraine haven't changed. In his usual coded way, he said an agreement could be reached only once the 'primary roots' of the conflict were 'eliminated'—which means, basically, that Ukraine should be part of Russia. 'We expect that Kyiv and European capitals will perceive that constructively and that they won't throw a wrench in the works,' Putin said, in what sounded like a warning. 'They will not make any backroom dealings to conduct provocations to torpedo the nascent progress.' As Putin and Trump boarded their respective airplanes for their flights home, Ukraine and Europe were left guessing as to what the coming days will bring. Will more missiles fly toward Kyiv? Will a second meeting involving Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky occur? The president was equally as vague in a Fox News interview taped after the summit, though he did suggest that the next steps in the process would be up to Zelensky. What was clear today was that Trump, who had once promised to bring the war to a close within 24 hours, left the summit empty-handed. 'Summits usually have deliverables. This meeting had none,' Michael McFaul, an ambassador to Russia under President Barack Obama, told me. 'I hope that they made some progress towards next steps in the peace process. But there is no evidence of that yet.' At their last summit, in Helsinki in 2018, Trump and Putin captivated the world when they took questions, revealing details of their private discussions as the American president sided with Moscow, rather than his own U.S. intelligence agencies, over Russia's 2016 election interference. This time, they quickly ducked offstage as reporters shouted in vain. When the two men did speak, they mostly delivered pleasantries. Putin even repeated Trump's talking point that Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022 would never have happened had Trump been in office then. And Trump, once more, said that the two men 'had to put up with the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax.' That the summit happened at all was perceived by many as a victory for Putin, who, after years as an international pariah, was granted a photo with a U.S. president on American soil—on land that once belonged to Russia, no less. And he was greeted in an over-the-top, stage-managed welcome that involved a literal red carpet for a man accused of war crimes. Putin disembarked his plane this morning moments after Trump stepped off Air Force One, and the two men strode toward each other past parked F-22 fighter jets before meeting with a warm handshake and smiles. After posing for photographs, and quickly peering up at a military flyover that roared above them, the two men stepped into the presidential limousine, the heavily fortified vehicle known as 'the Beast.' The White House had announced earlier in the day that the two men would not have a previously planned one-on-one meeting, but would instead have a pair of sitdowns flanked by advisers. But here, in the backseat of the Beast, Putin had his time alone with Trump. As the limousine drove off the tarmac to the summit site, Putin could be seen in a rear window laughing. Putin and Trump were scheduled to have a formal meeting at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, followed by lunch. But after the first meeting ran long, extending to more than three hours, reporters were abruptly rushed to the room where the press conference would be staged. The second meeting had been canceled. Had there been a breakthrough or a blowup? Putin sported the better body language: He almost glowed as he spoke to the press, offering a history lesson about Alaska, while praising the 'neighborly' relations between the men. And, oddly, he got to speak first, even though Trump was the summit's host. Trump, in contrast, seemed subdued, only perking up when Putin ended their media appearance by suggesting that their next summit be in Moscow. 'I think Trump did not lose, but Putin clearly won. Putin got everything he could have wished for, but he's not home free yet,' John Bolton, who was a national security adviser in Trump's first term, told me. 'Zelensky and the Europeans must be dismayed. And I thought Trump looked very tired at the press event. Putin looked energetic.' Putin seemed eager to broaden the conversation beyond Ukraine. He brought Russian business leaders to Alaska, hoping to play to Trump's hopes of better economic relations between the two countries, and perhaps strike a rare-earth-minerals deal. He also suggested earlier this week that he would revisit a nuclear-arms agreement, perhaps allowing Trump to leave the summit with some sort of win that did not involve Ukraine. But nothing was announced on those fronts either. The fear in Kyiv and across Europe was that Trump is so desperate for the fighting to stop, he might have agreed to Putin's terms regardless of what Ukraine wants. That did not happen, which was cheered across the continent, and Trump said he would soon consult with Zelensky and NATO. But Putin has shown no sign of compromising his positions. He wants Russia to keep the territory it conquered, and Ukraine to forgo the security guarantees that could prevent Moscow from attacking again. Those terms are nonstarters for Ukraine. The Europeans and Ukrainians had good reason to be nervous about today's summit. Trump has spent most of his decade on the global stage being extraordinarily deferential to Putin, which continued when he returned to the White House this year. He initially sided with Russia—even blaming Ukraine for causing its own invasion—before slowly souring on Putin's refusal to end the war. This summit came together in about a week's time' final details were still being arranged even as some of Putin's delegation arrived in Alaska yesterday. Trump's personal envoy, Steve Witkoff, had made several visits to Moscow in recent months. He had been in the Middle East when he received word through a back channel that Putin might finally be willing to come to the table given Trump's more hostile rhetoric toward Putin and threat of sanctions. After a series of meetings with key Trump senior aides and multiple flights across the Atlantic, Witkoff met again with Putin and accepted the offer of a summit. (He also accepted a twisted gift: Putin presented Witkoff an Order of Lenin award to pass along to a senior CIA official whose son had been killed in Ukraine fighting alongside Russia.) Summits, particularly those as high-stakes as ones between American and Russian presidents, usually take weeks if not months to plan. Everything is carefully choreographed: the agenda, the participants, the ceremony. Normally, the outcome is more or less predetermined: In the days before the actual summit, aides hash out some sort of agreement so the two leaders simply need to show up and shake hands to make the deal official. That was clearly not the case today—or in other Trump-Putin meetings. Trump had met with Putin seven previous times, all but one coming on the sidelines of larger summits and all friendly. The first was at the G20 in Hamburg, Germany, in 2017, when the two men sat next to each other for an hours-long leaders dinner. Their last meeting, at the G20 in Osaka, Japan, in the fall of 2019, ended with Trump mockingly warning Putin to never interfere again in American elections, with a sarcastic smile and exaggerated finger wag. But Helsinki is the headliner. It came against the backdrop of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into possible ties between the Trump campaign and Moscow. I was one of the two American journalists called upon to ask a question, and I posed to Trump whether he believed Putin or his own U.S. intelligence agencies about Russia's interference in the 2016 election. Putin glared at me. Trump sided with Moscow. The eruption on both sides of the Atlantic was fierce and immediate, and even some loyal Republicans said they thought Trump's answer was a betrayal of American values. Some of Trump's top aides—including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Chief of Staff John Kelly—were photographed with pained expressions on their faces. Fiona Hill, Trump's Russia adviser, told me later she nearly faked a heart attack in a desperate attempt to get the summit to stop. Anchorage wasn't Helsinki. For that, Europe can be grateful. Trump didn't give away Ukrainian land to Russia or demand that Zelensky take a bad deal, at least immediately. But Putin did get much of what he wanted, including a high-profile summit and, most of all, more time to continue his war. When he boarded his plane to leave Alaska, he was spotted smiling again.
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump Grades His Meeting With Vladimir Putin as a 10 of 10
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump on Friday lauded his bilateral summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, telling Fox News host Sean Hannity that he would rate the meeting as a 10 out of 10. Why It Matters Trump and Putin met Friday at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska, to discuss ending Moscow's war against Ukraine, which Putin launched in February 2022. The White House said the Russian leader reached out to request the meeting, to which Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was not invited. What To Know "If you had to grade it on a scale of 1 to 10?" Hannity, arguably one of Trump's staunchest supporters in the conservative media sphere, asked the president during a prime-time broadcast Friday following the Trump-Putin summit. "So I think the meeting was a 10 in the sense that we got along great," Trump replied. "And it's good when two big powers get along especially when they're nuclear powers. You know, we're number one, they're number two in the world and that's a big deal ... you never even want to mention that word. The word 'nuclear.'" The American president went on to say that the ball is now in Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's court, though he declined to say whether the Russian leader had made any concessions during the three-hour summit. On the Ukrainian side, meanwhile, there was little hope for progress following the Trump-Putin talks. Putin "won the informational war," Oleksandr Merezhko, chair of the foreign affairs committee in the Ukrainian parliament, told The New York Times. He added that Putin repeated his talking points during joint remarks with Trump after the summit, saying, "I don't see any changes." This is a breaking news story. Updates to follow.
USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
Native Ukrainian left speechless after ‘no deal' summit
Native Ukrainians disappointed after no deal was reached Trump and Putin's high stakes summit Ukrainian-American Volodymyr Valchuk said he already had low expectations for the high-stakes summit between President Donald Trump and Russian leader Vladimir Putin. But after listening to the world leaders meet in person for the first time in six years to end Russia's war in Ukraine, Valchuk admitted this was a head-shaker. "I'm speechless. I have nothing to say. I really didn't expect much, but this is even worse than I thought," Valchuk, 46, told USA TODAY. "That's what I'm feeling right now." Valchuk, a respiratory therapist who lives in San Rafael, California, said he's "very disappointed" when Trump said "no deal" was reached to end the three-year Ukraine war. 'At least they could've given us a little idea what Putin said the agreement was,' Valchuk said about the summit held in Anchorage, Alaska. 'Trump said he will talk to NATO and (Ukrainian President Volodymyr) Zelenskyy, but I really don't know what that means? 'Yeah, I'm disappointed,' said Valchuk, who came from Ukraine to the US to attend college in 1996. 'Very disappointed.' Valchuk, who gained his American citizenship in 2004, said he doesn't know what will happen next for his homeland. 'I just hope it's not going to cost Ukraine some of its land and more lives,' Valchuk said. 'I hope.' Live updates: Trump, Putin meet in Alaska summit How the war looks for two Ukrainian teens currently in the US For two Ukrainian-born teenagers, Taisiia Grygorova and Sofiia Kopytko, who are spending this summer performing across the East Coast in a play titled "Voices from Ukraine: Stories of War and Hope," they told USA TODAY that no matter what outcome comes from the summit in Anchorage, Alaska, the war can't end soon enough. Grygorova, 19, who lives in Kharkiv, a city near the Ukrainian-Russian border, said despite the constant rocket attacks, drones, air raids, and explosions, her thoughts are always with the people suffering through the continuous combat. Grygorova, who's studying journalism at Warsaw International University, said she regularly returns to Kharkiv to visit her parents and four younger siblings, despite the dangers. "And every time I go there I prepare myself, 'Taia, you're going for two weeks, and it's a 100% chance that you will get under a rocket attack at least four times during this time, but you'll be fine, your younger brothers and sisters live in this nightmare every day, you can handle two weeks,'" Grygorova said. Grygorova said her youngest brother, a six-year-old, is supposed to start school this year, but she wonders how with the threat of bombings. "You will ask, 'What risk?' Well, there is always a possibility that one of those bombs, which are flying over the city, will hit a school where kids are studying," Grygorova said. "My brother is going to study underground, with no sunlight, with no possibility to play outside, to run freely over a football pitch or hear the birds singing." Grygorova said her mother keeps all of the family documents near the front door, just in case they need to leave their house forever. "That's how the war looks for me and my family," Grygorova said. Sofiia Kopytko, 18, from Chernihiv, Ukraine, said the war has not only been about territory, the lack of resources and weapons, but also the doctors who work in critical conditions, and families like Grygorova's who live in occupied territories and face death daily as a result of random air strikes. "Human lives are not statistics, but the most valuable thing that each of us has, and we must protect it," Kopytko said. "After all, you never know what tomorrow holds and whether it will come at all." Grygorova said she desperately wants the war to end so that people can live their lives in peace. "I hope that when the war is over, I'll be able to visit my family without fear," Grygorova said. "I hope that my city will be renovated. I hope I'll be able to help in the rebuilding of my country, where I want my future kids to grow up." Kopytko said her wishes are quite simple. "That there will be no more news of death and destruction, just simple happiness," Kopytko said. "Of course, I can talk about building a career and a family, but for me, these are the components of the happiness I strive for. First and foremost, free people in a free country. In a free Ukraine."
