Military families sue Trump administration to keep their school system diverse
The top-performing, globally most diverse American school system is the subject of a lawsuit alleging that the Trump administration violated students' First Amendment rights. Twelve students from military families stationed across four countries have filed a federal complaint accusing the U.S. Department of Defense Education Activity of censoring books, gutting inclusive curricula, and banning cultural history events—all in service of what they describe as a political agenda imposed by the Trump administration.
Keep up with the latest in + news and politics.
Students at military bases have been staging protests and walkouts at schools around the world to voice their opposition to the changes in a school environment that previously allowed all students to thrive.
The suit, filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Virginia, alleges that recent executive orders signed by President Donald Trump have triggered widespread First Amendment violations within the DoDEA school system, which serves more than 67,000 children of active-duty military personnel.
Related: DOJ appeals block on Pentagon's transgender military ban
The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Virginia, and the ACLU of Kentucky brought the legal action on behalf of 12 students from six families. These students from pre-K to 11th grade attend DoDEA schools in Virginia, Kentucky, Italy, and Japan. According to the complaint, their schools have 'quarantined' books, scrubbed curriculum references to race and gender, canceled Black History and Pride Month events, and prohibited discussions of 'gender ideology' under directives from three Trump executive orders signed in January.
Despite being largely invisible to the broader public, DoDEA is one of the highest-achieving public education systems in the United States. It spans 161 schools across seven U.S. states, 11 countries, Guam, and Puerto Rico, educating the children of service members and Department of Defense civilian personnel. It is also one of the nation's most racially diverse school systems.
In January, DoDEA again led the nation on the 2024 National Assessment of Educational Progress, known as the Nation's Report Card. DoDEA fourth and eighth-graders scored up to 25 points higher than the national public school average in reading and math. press release.
Related: Transgender Army officer Erica Vandal was born into military service. Now, she's suing Trump to stay in
'These schools are some of the most diverse and high-achieving in the nation,' said Emerson Sykes, senior staff attorney with the ACLU's Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. 'It is particularly insulting to strip their shelves of diverse books and erase women, LGBTQ people, and people of color from the curriculum to serve a political goal. Our clients deserve better, and the First Amendment demands it.'
The ACLU's complaint details how DoDEA officials, acting under Trump's executive orders, ordered staff to pull books referencing race, gender identity, or 'discriminatory equity ideology' and relocate them to inaccessible 'professional collections.' Some school libraries were temporarily shut down during the purge.
Among the books reportedly removed: The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini, A Queer History of the United States by Michael Bronski, The Antiracist Kid by Tiffany Jewell, and even Hillbilly Elegy by Vice President JD Vance. The administration also targeted picture books like Julian Is a Mermaid and Julianne Moore's Freckleface Strawberry.
In addition, schools canceled entire chapters from health classes on puberty, reproduction, consent, and STDs. The Trump administration stripped the AP Psychology curriculum of its unit on gender and sex—even though the material still appears on the national exam. Students say they are now unprepared for college-level testing.
Related: Pete Hegseth receives jeers from U.S. service members' families at military base in Germany
'By quarantining library books and whitewashing curricula in its civilian schools, the Department of Defense Education Activity is violating students' First Amendment rights,' said Matt Callahan, senior supervising attorney at the ACLU of Virginia. 'The government can't scrub references to race and gender from public school libraries and classrooms just because the Trump administration doesn't like certain viewpoints on those topics.'
The administration's reach has gone beyond textbooks and into school culture. According to the ACLU, the Defense Department has banned official recognition of Black History Month, Pride Month, Women's History Month, and other cultural observances. Even student yearbooks have been scrutinized, with new rules prohibiting any 'visual depictions, written content, or editorial choices' that could be construed as promoting 'gender ideology.' In other words, trans and nonbinary kids of military service members don't exist and cannot be celebrated in their previously supportive school environment.
'Our clients have a right to receive an education that includes an open and honest dialogue about America's history,' said Corey Shapiro, legal director of the ACLU of Kentucky. 'Censoring books and canceling assignments about the contributions of Black Americans is not only wrong, but antithetical to our First Amendment rights.'
The suit names Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and DoDEA Director Beth Schiavino-Narvaez in their official capacities. Students are seeking a permanent injunction blocking the enforcement of school executive orders and a court order to restore removed books and curricula.
'Students in DoDEA schools, though they are members of military families, have the same First Amendment rights as all students,' said Sykes. 'Like everyone else, they deserve classrooms where they are free to read, speak, and learn about themselves, their neighbors, and the world around them.'
The lawsuit comes as the ACLU fights on multiple fronts to defend civil liberties under the Trump administration, including challenges to immigration policies, attacks on reproductive rights, and free speech crackdowns.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Patents and economies of scale support Pfizer's wide moat
Pfizer's innovative business should grow faster after it divests its off-patent division Upjohn in 2020 to create Viatris and Mylan. With fewer older medications and fewer patent losses, Pfizer is well-positioned for consistent growth, excluding the erratic sales of Covid-19-related products. The company is less vulnerable to any one patent loss thanks to its wide range of medications. Because of its more complex manufacturing process and more affordable prices, Pfizer's stronger position in the vaccine marketwhich includes the pneumococcal vaccine Prevnarmakes it more resilient to generic competition. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 6 Warning Signs with PFE. With a 30% to 80% reduction, Trump's executive order would establish a "most favored nation" policy in which the US would pay the same amount for prescription medications as the nation with the lowest price. It is anticipated that this policy, which was previously blocked by courts, will reduce the US's annual drug spending of over $400 billion, saving taxpayers over a seven-year period. Given that drug prices in the United States are high when compared to other countries, Pfizer's U.S. revenue could be drastically impacted by the 30% to 80% price cut, especially for high-margin medications. International reference pricing policies have long been opposed by the pharmaceutical industry, which claims they could hinder innovation and limit access to new companies anticipate that the order will target Medicare and may have an impact on medications not covered by Biden's Inflation Reduction Act. President Trump has said that significant tariffs on pharmaceutical products will probably be announced soon. He has also put a 90-day hold on broader tariffs for the majority of his trading partners to give them time to negotiate. Despite being mostly exempt from tariffs, the biopharma industry is preparing for a possible pharma-specific announcement that might affect global manufacturing strategies. Products made in Europe and imported into the US may be subject to the rumored 25% tariff, necessitating the construction of new facilities that will take years to complete. Due to home country manufacturing, tax benefits, lower production costs, and exposure to currency fluctuations, businesses based in the US and Europe are heavily exposed to European manufacturing. Because drug spending is not cyclical, the direct effect of tariffs on earnings is probably going to be minimal, and the indirect effect of a possible recession should also be minimal. With the exception of small-scale US capacity expansions, biopharma is unlikely to completely reevaluate its manufacturing footprint if pharmaceutical tariffs are implemented but are lifted after 2026 as a result of political pressure from the midterm elections. Leadership in Vaccines Pfizer stands out with its dominant position in vaccines, most notably its highly successful COVID-19 vaccine developed in partnership with BioNTech. This vaccine not only generated significant revenue but also established Pfizer as a leader in mRNA technology, a platform with potential applications in oncology, rare diseases, and beyond. Johnson & Johnson (J&J): J&J also developed a COVID-19 vaccine, but it was less widely adopted due to lower efficacy rates and safety concerns, giving Pfizer a clear advantage in this high-impact area. GlaxoSmithKline (GSK): GSK has a strong vaccine portfolio (e.g., shingles and meningitis vaccines) but did not independently develop a COVID-19 vaccine, relying on partnerships like Sanofi, which delayed its entry and diminished its competitive stance. Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS): BMS has no significant presence in vaccines, focusing instead on oncology and immunology, making Pfizer's vaccine leadership a unique strength. R&D Capabilities and Pipeline Focus Pfizer's R&D efforts are concentrated on high-growth therapeutic areas such as oncology, vaccines, and rare diseases. Its ability to leverage mRNA technology and rapidly develop innovative therapies underscores its R&D prowess. J&J: J&J's R&D spans pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and consumer health. While this diversification provides stability, it may dilute J&J's focus on cutting-edge pharmaceutical innovation compared to Pfizer's targeted approach. GSK: GSK excels in respiratory diseases and HIV research, but its pipeline is less broad and lacks the same level of innovation in emerging technologies like mRNA that Pfizer is advancing. BMS: BMS has a strong oncology pipeline, particularly in immuno-oncology, but its narrower focus limits its competitiveness in other high-growth areas where Pfizer thrives, such as vaccines and rare diseases. Global Reach and Market Presence Pfizer operates in over 150 countries, giving it a vast global footprint that enhances its ability to distribute products and capture market share across both developed and emerging markets. J&J: J&J also has a global presence, but its focus is split across pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and consumer health, potentially reducing its pharmaceutical market penetration compared to Pfizer. GSK: GSK is strong in Europe and emerging markets but less dominant in the U.S., the world's largest pharmaceutical market, where Pfizer has a significant advantage. BMS: BMS focuses heavily on the U.S. and Europe, with less presence in emerging markets, limiting its global scale compared to Pfizer. Brand Reputation and Trust The success of Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine has significantly boosted its brand recognition and trust among consumers, healthcare providers, and governments, reinforcing its market position. J&J: J&J enjoys a strong reputation in consumer health, but its pharmaceutical division lacks the same level of visibility and trust as Pfizer's, particularly after COVID-19 vaccine challenges. GSK: GSK is well-regarded in respiratory and HIV treatments but does not have the broad public recognition that Pfizer has achieved. BMS: BMS is respected in oncology but lacks the widespread brand prominence that Pfizer has cultivated. Innovation in Emerging Technologies Pfizer's investment in mRNA technology positions it as a pioneer in pharmaceutical innovation, with potential applications in vaccines, cancer treatments, and more, giving it a forward-looking edge. J&J: J&J innovates in medical devices and consumer health but trails Pfizer in adopting next-generation pharmaceutical technologies like mRNA. GSK: GSK focuses on innovation in respiratory and HIV treatments but has not made significant advances in mRNA or other emerging platforms. BMS: BMS drives innovation in immuno-oncology but lacks Pfizer's breadth and leadership in cutting-edge technologies. Pfizer's competitive edge over Johnson & Johnson, GlaxoSmithKline, and Bristol Myers Squibb lies in its unmatched leadership in vaccines, particularly through mRNA technology, combined with a robust R&D pipeline, extensive global reach, substantial financial resources, strong brand reputation, and a focus on innovation. While J&J benefits from diversification, GSK from efficiency, and BMS from oncology expertise, none rival Pfizer's comprehensive strengths across these critical areas, ensuring its dominance in the pharmaceutical landscape. Pfizer's broad moat is supported by patents, economies of scale, and a strong distribution network. Strong pricing power derived from Pfizer's patent-protected medications allows the company to produce returns on investment that exceed its cost of capital. The company can develop the next generation of drugs before generic competition appears thanks to the patents. Furthermore, even though Pfizer has a wide range of products, there is some product concentration, as Prevnar accounts for slightly more than 10% of total sales (not including sales of the COVID-19 vaccine).However, because of the vaccine's complicated manufacturing process and comparatively low cost, we don't anticipate typical generic competition. Ibrance and Eliquis each account for nearly 10% of sales. On the other hand, we anticipate that new products will eventually lessen the competition from generic versions of important medications. In order to lessen the pressure on margins from lost sales of high-margin drugs, Pfizer's operating structure permits cost-cutting after patent losses. All things considered, Pfizer's well-established product line generates the massive cash flows required to cover the typical $800 million in development expenses for each new medication. For smaller pharmaceutical companies without Pfizer's resources, the company's robust distribution network positions it as a solid partner. On April 15, President Donald Trump issued an executive order outlining possible policy changes intended to reduce the cost of pharmaceuticals in the United States. The biopharma industry is looking forward to these changes because they have the potential to either help or hurt innovation. In the worst situation, international price benchmarks have the potential to drastically cut US drug prices and lessen financial incentives for international drug development. On the plus side, eliminating the "pill penalty" that only grants small molecule medications nine years of Medicare negotiation protection may promote innovation across all treatment modalities. Trump's executive order may have a positive or negative impact on the industry, but it has no effect on valuations or uncertainty ratings. The protection period is not specified in Trump's request that US Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. collaborate with Congress to address the pill penalty, which is contingent upon Congressional action. Since innovation and a favorable mergers and acquisitions climate support long-term pricing power and offset possible short-term tariff pressure, rising tax rates, and approval delays, the biopharma industry seems undervalued. Due to liver damage in a clinical trial, Pfizer has announced the discontinuation of danuglipron, an oral small molecule GLP-1 agonist. In the anticipated $200 billion global GLP-1 market by 2031, the company sought to provide a potential second-to-market oral small molecule GLP-1 agonist, behind Lilly's orforglipron. Clinical trial failures and declining demand for Pfizer's COVID vaccine and antiviral medication have hurt the company's growth. Because of its diverse pipeline and portfolio, Pfizer is expected to have a wide-moat case, protecting it from the effects of individual program failures, especially those involving high-risk programs like danuglipron. Other medication candidates might benefit from Pfizer's objective of turning danuglipron into a once-daily business could use its $15 billion acquisition budget to fund the development of more sophisticated medication candidates. Efforts in Genetic Engineering: A solid growth driver for Pfizer is the strong pipeline of innovative treatment options, especially in oncology and immunology, which take the leap with cutting-edge scientific technology. To be more specific, Pfizer's resource allocation to immuno-oncology is evident, developing of checkpoint inhibitors (e.g., PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors) and chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies. For instance, this method of treatment mitigates the immune system's ability to detect and destroy the specified cancer cells by varying the immune system response or, in some cases, by using specially modified T-cells that can identify the particular antigens on tumors that are solely expressed in those particular tumors, which are in question. This is the area of advancement where Pfizer has outdone the rest as they are perfecting monoclonal antibody formatsdesigning them in a way that they will bind more tightly and specifically to targets using protein engineeringand they are also testing out bispecific antibodies that trigger switches at two targets, therefore enhancing healing by more than one method. The pipeline is further supported by vast R&D investment in gene therapy and precision medicine, which utilize adeno-associated virus (AAV) vector platforms for gene delivery and next-generation sequencing for actionable mutation identification respectively. These endeavors are aimed at enhancing the overall patient health and market potential of the drugs by changing the treatment convention from testing a wide spectrum to one that is genotype-driven. Clinical trials are usually designed in a way to be fast-tracked so that they can move quickly to the next stage of development. By focusing on such advanced technologies, Pfizer is embarking on capturing a large section of the market with high-growth therapeutic branches, thus gaining revenue through innovation guided by complex disease biology. Revenue Growth: The launching of these high-value treatments is expected to increase revenue as well as drive down costs for Pfizer. Most of the drugs that are released in the onco-immunology field possess a technical edge and therapeutic effectiveness, therefore, these new treatements often demand high price. These drugs are capable of pumping up profits significantly once they clear regulatory hurdles and find their way onto the market. take the example of just-above successful immuno-oncology drug sales, which always have brisk selling and marvelous sales. In addition, Pfizer can speed-up the whole clinical process with something like adaptive trial designs, this process will be quicker and thus benefits are obtained faster from the new products. Impact on profitability The weight on profitability depends on the ratio of costs and returns. What is actually known is that lamas like the checkpoint inhibitors and CAR-T treatments that are so good require a lot of investment in R&D. But there is an inherent advantage for these drugs thanks to their patent protection that comes with market exclusivity, which in turn, allows Pfizer to keep its pricing strategy stick and generate very high profits. Success in the selling of the product along the lines of this new dimension along with the efficiency of producing more could prove to be the road to better profitability. However, there are barriers such as competition from other drug companies plus the worry of the price cuts from payers that can erode this success. So if Pfizer is able to eliminate the competition and stays ahead in the game by reducing costs as well, these high markups brought about by the introduction of such innovative drugs should positively affect the total profitability of the company. Generic competition, possible changes to government drug pricing policies, the more stringent FDA, and more powerful managed-care and pharmacy benefit managers present Pfizer with difficulties in drug development. In some disease areas, developing new drugs is getting harder, and pharmacy benefit managers and managed-care organizations have grown to be strong players with the ability to bargain for cheaper drug costs. Nearly one-fourth of the company's total sales are generated by its medications, Eliquis, Ibrance, and Xtandi, and they are heavily exposed to the Medicare channel. Given that Pfizer's product portfolio is less vulnerable to potential litigation, the company's base-case annual legal costs, assuming a 50% probability of future costs associated with product governance ESG risks, come close to 1% of non-GAAP net income. Pfizer's valuation multiples highlights their strong financial position and potential undervaluation. Their P/E Non-GAAP ratios7.61 (FY1), 7.42 (FY2), and 7.44 (FY3)are lower than JNJ's 14.00 (FY1) and SNY's 10.80 (FY1), suggesting investors may undervalue our earnings potential. The PEG Non-GAAP (FWD) of 1.49 is competitive, higher than SNY's 0.76 but below JNJ's 1.70, reflecting moderate growth prospects. Pfizer's EV/Sales (TTM) of 2.81 is more conservative than JNJ's 4.21, while the EV/EBITDA (FWD) of 7.13 compares favorably to JNJ's 11.45, indicating operational efficiency. The Price to Book (TTM) of 1.44 is significantly lower than JNJ's 5.23, and our Price to Cash Flow (TTM) of 9.29 beats JNJ's 15.67, underscoring robust cash flow generation. These metrics position Pfizer as a value opportunity among peers After the Seagen acquisition, Pfizer released its 2024 guidance, which included a $8 billion COVID-19 product guidance$5 billion less than anticipated. The business admitted that, excluding sales of COVID-19 products, it would not meet the prior growth-rate projection of 6% from 2020 to 2025. Pfizer reaffirmed its support for the dividend, which is regarded as safe and likely to boost stock valuation, despite the deteriorating outlook. Over the next ten years, the company anticipates steady sales as new products counteract older medications that are losing their patent protection. From the middle of 2023 to the end of 2024, Pfizer is anticipated to reduce operating expenses by $4 billion, which will aid the company in adjusting to the waning pandemic and declining sales of COVID-19 products. Growth could be accelerated through acquisitions, and future margin pressure could be reduced through restructuring initiatives. It is estimated that Pfizer's weighted average cost of capital is 7% and its cost of equity is 7.5%. Activist investor Jeffrey Smith's recent stake worth $407 million could presage the much needed turnarounds at Pfizer. Investors and shareholders can reasonably expect further cost-cuts and an efficient use of capital, leading to higher margins and free cashflow. This case could follow the path of Walt Disney, albeit with less drama, where Jeff Ubben of ValueAct had a pivotal role in Disney's turnaround campaign. The large-cap biopharma company Pfizer's debt size, business cyclicality, and debt maturity outlook all contribute to its sound balance sheet and low risk levels. To support opportunistic acquisitions and handle product litigation issues with little market concern, the company should have a strong enough balance sheet. Pfizer spends slightly less on R&D than the industry average, with a mid- to high-teens percentage of sales. Patent losses are offset by the company's robust pipeline of next-generation medications. The company's investment in cutting-edge new medications, mostly aimed at immunology and oncology, improves its standing and increases returns on capital. For biopharma companies in the sector, this balance sheet strength is essential. This article first appeared on GuruFocus. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Bill Maher Jokes the Musk-Trump Feud Is Like if ‘Godzilla Was on Ketamine and King Kong Had a Combover'
Bill Maher vowed that he wouldn't 'pretend I can really think about anything other than the Trump-Elon thing' during his monologue on Friday's 'Real Time.' He was referring of course to the very bitter (and weird) public fight between Donald Trump and Elon Musk. Maher compared the matter to ''Godzilla vs. King Kong'… if Godzilla was on ketamine and King Kong had a combover.' 'Man, these guys were so close, it was like Brangelina or benniffer,' Maher continued, joking that Trump and Musk also had their own couple name, 'Elump.' 'What happened… this has been brewing for a while, okay, people, the first sign was last week at Elon's little going away party. Remember that? And Elon showed up with a black eye…. he said it was because he was roughhousing with his kid and the kid clocked him. And yeah, I believe that,' Maher continued. 'And so Trump said, 'I offered him a little makeup… and he turned it down.' 'And then Trump said, 'which was interesting.' Yeah, weird. Elon, what sort of man turns down makeup?' Maher added, at which point he caught his audience up on the blow by blow. This included how Musk called Trump's 'big beautiful bill' a 'disgusting abomination,' how Trump said Musk has 'Trump derangement syndrome,' and how Musk said Trump's tariffs will cause a recession. Maher also amusingly flubbed the last bit, saying 'erection' to laughter from the audience before correcting to 'recession.' Maher also reminded viewers how Trump claimed Musk was only mad 'because I took away the mandate for his electric vehicles, which nobody really wants anyway,' and how Musk angrily declared Trump wouldn't even be president without his help. 'And then the s— got real. And Trump said, 'Well, you know what, Mars is, a s—hole planet,' Maher joked. Maher then noted how Musk has even claimed Trump is somehow implicated in the Epstein files and is actively covering it up, adding, 'now this is just a war that is going back and forth and back and forth, and the stakes are so high because the winner faces Blake Lively.' 'That's where we are with this. The latest update is tomorrow. Apparently, Elon is going to be coming by to the White House to pick up his CDs and the mixtape they made together… But it looks like it may go from a war of words to a you know, other stuff, because Trump is now saying he might cancel Elon subsidies and Elon's contracts. Cool. So I guess in the end, Elon did save the taxpayer money,' Maher quipped. You can watch the whole monologue below: The post Bill Maher Jokes the Musk-Trump Feud Is Like if 'Godzilla Was on Ketamine and King Kong Had a Combover' | Video appeared first on TheWrap.
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
If You Were Cut Off For Not Supporting Trump, We Want To Hear Your Story
America has become increasingly polarized in the last decade, and much of the blame, IMO, goes to one man: President Donald Trump. Trump's divisive policies and rhetoric have torn apart friendships, communities, and families. The cult-like behavior from many of his followers has led many people to cut off Trump supporters from their lives. This is something we've covered — but now we want to hear from people who themselves were cut off for not supporting Trump. Related: What Type Of Engagement Ring Is Perfect For You? Plan Your Wedding To Find Out Do you have a family member who stopped speaking to you because you did not vote for Donald Trump? Related: Which Sea Creature Are You? Order At A High-Class Restaurant To Find Out Maybe a friendship of many years ended because you disagreed about Trump's tariffs. Perhaps a partner even broke up with you because you pointed out misinformation or called out misogyny in the current administration. Whatever happened, we want to hear about it. Tell us who cut you off and how it went down in the comments below — or via this anonymous form — and you could be featured in an upcoming BuzzFeed Community post. Also in Community: Wanna Know Which Disney Princess Is Your 100% Personality Twin? Just Eat A Bunch Of Desserts To Find Out Also in Community: There Are 6 Universal Wedding Dress Aesthetics — Here's Your Best Fit Also in Community: I'll Be Really Impressed If You Can Get 15/15 On This Really Hard World Capital Quiz
