Investigation finds RI Public School District offered student loan forgiveness to only non-White teachers
By Rachel del Guidice
Published July 28, 2025
FIRST ON FOX: An investigation conducted by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission found there was reasonable cause to believe that the Providence Public School District was unlawfully discriminating against White teachers by only offering student loan forgiveness to non-White educators.
"The evidence obtained during the investigation establishes reasonable cause to believe that Respondent engaged in unlawful discrimination against a class of White applicants and employees who applied and were hired by Respondent in a teaching position for five academic years starting with the 2021-2022 school year based on their race, color and national origin," the EEOC's final determination letter stated on Thursday.
In 2022, the Legal Insurrection Foundation , a Rhode Island-based nonprofit investigative and research group, filed a civil rights complaint with the U.S. Department of Education against the Providence Public School District.
CORNELL UNIVERSITY HIT WITH FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT OVER ALLEGED DISCRIMINATORY DEI PRACTICES
The group alleged that the Providence Public School District offered a program giving student loan forgiveness to new teachers available only to non-White educators.
The complaint maintained that the Providence Public School District "engaged in a continuing violation and an ongoing pattern or practice of discrimination" with a student loan forgiveness program for newly and recently hired educators that is only accessible to non-White applicants, which was called the "Educator of Color Loan Forgiveness Program."
The Providence Public School District reportedly said that recipients can have up to $25,000 of college loans forgiven once the teacher completes three consecutive years of teaching in the district. Eligibility requirements indicate recipients must "identify as Asian, Black, Indigenous, Latino, biracial, or multi-racial."
The EEOC final determination letter states that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, mandates that if violations are found, the Providence Public School District must work to bring a resolution.
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT INVESTIGATING UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA OVER ALLEGED DEI-BASED HIRING
It directs the Providence Public School District to contact the EEOC "within ten days upon your receipt of this letter to indicate your willingness to participate in EEOC's conciliation program to address the violation noted in this letter of determination."
In a statement to Fox News Digital, William Jacobson, Cornell law professor and founder of the Equal Protection Project, said, "After almost three years of effort, EPP is seeing the legal pieces fall into place to stop this racist program and to hold those responsible accountable."
"The U.S. Department of Justice has opened a formal investigation and now the EEOC has issued a finding of 'reasonable cause' to believe the civil rights laws were violated," Jacobson said. "We are gratified by the findings of the EEOC, and look forward to the EEOC taking further legal action to vindicate the rights of hundreds, if not thousands, of White teachers who were subject to unlawful discriminatory treatment."
Fox News Digital reached out to the Providence Public School District for comment, but did not immediately receive a response.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Fox News' Brian Flood contributed to this report. Print Close
URL
https://www.foxnews.com/media/investigation-finds-ri-public-school-district-offered-student-loan-forgiveness-only-non-white-teachers
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
2 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Precinct DTLA, well-known gay bar, warns it could close after former employee claims discrimination
A downtown Los Angeles bar known as a haven for the gay community is warning it could soon shutter as it faces a costly legal fight with a former employee. 'We're a couple of slow weekends away from having to close our doors,' owners of Precinct DTLA wrote Friday on Instagram. 'Like many small businesses, we've taken hit after hit — from COVID shutdowns and ICE raids to citywide curfews and the ongoing decline of nightlife. But what we're facing now is even more devastating.' In May, Jessica Gonzales sued the bar, its owner, manager and an employee, alleging she faced discrimination and harassment as a cisgender, heterosexual woman and was subjected to an unsafe work environment. Gonzales, who worked at the bar on Broadway for eight years, claimed that when she reported employees and patrons were having sex in the bar, its owner told her to 'stop complaining.' According to a complaint filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, Gonzales was required to work the coat check for Precinct DTLA's weekly 'jockstrap / underwear party' without receiving pay. She said the bar's manager eliminated the coat check fee, believing it would 'incentivize more patrons to drop their pants.' Gonzales claimed the environment grew so hostile she needed to bring stress balls to work. One day, her complaint said, another employee grabbed her stress ball and refused to give it back to her. In a struggle over the stress ball, Gonzales claims the employee broke two of her fingers. According to her lawsuit, Gonzales was effectively fired after the incident, in part because Precinct DTLA's owner and manager wanted to replace her with a gay male employee. 'These claims are completely false,' the bar's representatives wrote on Instagram. In the post, they added that the lawyer representing Gonzales 'appears to have a clear anti-LGBTQ agenda.' 'There are multiple reports — including from individuals who previously worked with him — that he used anti-LGBTQ slurs in written emails while at his former firm,' they wrote on Instagram. Gonzales is represented by John Barber, court records show. The Times reported in 2023 that Barber and his colleague, Jeff Ranen, regularly denigrated Black, Jewish, Middle Eastern, Asian and gay people in emails they exchanged while partners at Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith. After Barber and Ranen left to start their own firm, Lewis Brisbois released scores of the lawyer's emails, which showed the men regularly used anti-gay slurs to refer to people, The Times reported. In a joint statement at the time, Barber and Ranen said they were 'ashamed' and 'deeply sorry.' Barber didn't immediately return a request for comment Saturday. In the Instagram post, Precinct DTLA's representatives said defending themselves from Gonzales' allegations was 'draining us emotionally and financially.' 'Come to the bar,' they wrote. 'Buy a drink. Order some food. Tip the staff. Show up.'
NBC News
2 hours ago
- NBC News
Columbia Sportswear sues Columbia University, alleging merchandise too similar and causes confusion
For decades, T-shirts, sweatshirts and other clothing under the Columbia Sportswear brand and clothing emblazoned with the Columbia University name coexisted more or less peacefully without confusion. But now, the Portland-based outdoor retailer has sued the New York-based university over alleged trademark infringement and a breach of contract, among other charges. It claims that the university's merchandise looks too similar to what's being sold at more than 800 retail locations including more than 150 of its branded stores as well as its website and third-party marketplaces. In a lawsuit filed July 23 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, Columbia Sportswear, whose roots date back to 1938, alleges that the university intentionally violated an agreement the parties signed on June 13, 2023. That agreement dictated how the university could use the word 'Columbia' on its own apparel. As part of the pact, the university could feature 'Columbia' on its merchandise provided that the name included a recognizable school insignia or its mascot, the word 'university,' the name of the academic department or the founding year of the university — 1754 — or a combination. But Columbia Sportswear alleges the university breached the agreement a little more than a year later, with the company noticing several garments without any of the school logos being sold at the Columbia University online store. Many of the garments feature a bright blue color that is 'confusingly similar' to the blue color that has long been associated with Columbia Sportswear, the suit alleged. The lawsuit offered photos of some of the Columbia University items that say only Columbia. 'The likelihood of deception, confusion, and mistake engendered by the university's misappropriation and misuse of the Columbia name is causing irreparable harm to the brand and goodwill symbolized by Columbia Sportswear's registered mark Columbia and the reputation for quality it embodies,' the lawsuit alleged. The lawsuit comes at a time when Columbia University has been threatened with the potential loss of billions of dollars in government support. Last week, Columbia University reached a deal with the Trump administration to pay more than $220 million to the federal government to restore federal research money that was canceled in the name of combating antisemitism on campus. Under the agreement, the Ivy League school will pay a $200 million settlement over three years, the university said. Columbia Sportswear aims to stop all sales of clothing that violate the agreement, recall any products already sold and donate any remaining merchandise to charity. Columbia Sportswear is also seeking three times the amount of actual damages determined by a jury.
Boston Globe
3 hours ago
- Boston Globe
FBI redacted Trump's name in Epstein files for privacy reasons
The review was part of a broader effort sparked by Trump's campaign promise to 'declassify' files related to Epstein, which his MAGA base has long requested. In March, FBI Director Kash Patel directed his special agents from the New York and Washington field offices to join the bureau's FOIA employees at the agency's sprawling Central Records Complex in Winchester, Virginia, and another building a few miles away. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Responding to public pressure, FBI personnel were instructed to search for and review every single Epstein-related document and determine what could be released. That included a mountain of material accumulated by the FBI over nearly two decades, including grand jury testimony, prosecutors' case files, as well as tens of thousands of pages of the bureau's own investigative files on Epstein. Advertisement It was a herculean task that involved as many as 1,000 FBI agents and other personnel pulling all-nighters while poring through more than 100,000 documents, according to a July letter from Senator Dick Durbin to US Attorney General Pam Bondi. Advertisement The employees reviewed the records using the Freedom of Information Act as their guide for deciding what information should be withheld. That alone isn't uncommon. In the FOIA, Congress established nine exemptions as a way to balance the public's right to know against the government's need to protect sensitive interests, such as national security, official deliberations, ongoing law enforcement proceedings or privacy. When such competing interests arise in non-FOIA matters, those exemptions are often applied even if the exact language set forth in the FOIA statute doesn't appear in the final record. A photograph of Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein at a London bus stop. Leon Neal/Getty While reviewing the Epstein files, FBI personnel identified numerous references to Trump in the documents, the people familiar with the matter said. Dozens of other high-profile public figures also appeared, the people said. In preparation for potential public release, the documents then went to a unit of FOIA officers who applied redactions in accordance with the nine exemptions. The people familiar with the matter said that Trump's name, along with other high-profile individuals, was blacked out because he was a private citizen when the federal investigation of Epstein was launched in 2006. Last month, the DOJ and the FBI concluded that 'no further disclosure' of the files 'would be appropriate or warranted.' Epstein avoided federal sex-trafficking charges in 2008 when he agreed to plead guilty to state charges in Florida for soliciting prostitution. In July 2019, following an investigation by the Miami Herald that also scrutinized the integrity of the government's probe, Epstein was indicted on federal charges of sex trafficking of minors. A month later, he died by suicide in his jail cell, federal law enforcement authorities said, while awaiting trial. Advertisement A White House spokesperson would not respond to questions about the redactions of Trump's name, instead referring queries to the FBI. The FBI declined to comment. The Justice Department did not respond to multiple requests for comment. In a statement on Friday after Bloomberg first reported the redactions, Durbin said that Trump 'has the power to unilaterally help fix this by consenting to the release of his name in the files to the public to fulfill the promises of Attorney General Bondi that the public would see the 'full Epstein files.'' ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
