Public schools that refuse to follow Trump's DEI directive are now in the crosshairs
Show Caption
Hide Caption
Federal judge blocks Trump from cutting school funding over DEI
A federal judge in New Hampshire has blocked the Trump administration from cutting federal funding from public schools that continue to run diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs.
unbranded - Newsworthy
Chicago school officials felt they needed to address the academic achievement gap between Black students and other kids on their campuses.
So they created the Black Student Success Plan, a program to help those kids thrive.
What they didn't know was that the program would become the center of a federal investigation and a symbol of rebellion against the Trump administration. Nor did they know that their district could lose federal funding.
Thousands of campuses from at least a dozen states have rejected President Donald Trump's claim that diversity, equity and inclusion programming violated federal civil rights law, and his directive to schools to eliminate them. They've continued to host academic programs that benefit certain disadvantaged groups of students and allow books and curricula about racial and social justice to remain in their classrooms.
U.S Department of Education officials wrote a memo to state officials on April 3 telling them schools must end programs that give advantages to students from one race or group over another. They first directed schools to comply with their order within 10 days, and then gave them an extension to comply by April 24. If they didn't, they said they risked losing federal dollars for violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bans discrimination based on race, color and national origin in federally-funded agencies and programs.
The 10-day mark and the extension has long passed.
The Education Department's Office of Civil Rights has since launched investigations into several alleged civil rights violations at dozens of universities and colleges, including Harvard University and Yale University.
Now the agency's focus has shifted to public schools that serve the nation's younger students. Trump's Education Department this month announced investigations into DEI programs at Chicago Public Schools and another Illinois school district: Evanston-Skokie School District 65.
Officials in Illinois are part of those from at least 19 states that have pushed back against Trump's directive and refused to cut programming that encourages diversity, equity and inclusion.
Here's what we know about the ongoing conflict over DEI between public schools and the Trump administration's Education Department.
'Root out DEI': Why red states are enlisting in Trump's war on 'woke'
What's happening in Illinois?
A national grassroots organization that advocates against DEI programs in schools, called Defending Education, complained on Feb. 21 about the Chicago program for Black students to the Education Department's Office of Civil Rights.
Nicole Neily, president and founder of Defending Education, grumbled about how Chicago district leaders "made a conscious decision to allocate finite resources to some students and not others."
'No student should be denied an educational opportunity because of the color of their skin, yet perversely, that's exactly what Chicago Public Schools has chosen to do – despite the fact that the district's own data clearly demonstrates that students of all races are struggling academically,' Neily wrote in a news release about the case.
On April 29, the U.S. Department of Education announced it had launched an investigation into the district and expressed concern that school leaders were giving "additional resources to favored students on the basis of race."
Craig Trainor, an acting assistant secretary for the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights, said the agency "will not allow federal funds, provided for the benefit of all students, to be used in this pernicious and unlawful manner," in a news release.
Ben Pagani, a spokesperson for Chicago Public Schools, declined to comment on the pending investigation. But he said the Black Student Success Plan is codified in and mandated by Illinois state law and incorporated in the district's five-year strategic plan.
Another Illinois district is also facing scrutiny.
The conservative national nonprofit organization Southeastern Legal Foundation filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights on behalf of Stacy Deemar, a teacher at Evanston-Skokie School District 65, who alleged the district's policies and practices violate a federal civil rights law, according to a news release from the Education Department.
The drama teacher complained about training seminars the district held "including one that employed racial stereotypes including concepts such as 'white talk' and 'color commentary' to describe how those of different races communicate."
She also said the district was sponsoring affinity groups for "both students and staff that are formally restricted on the basis of race, including one for staff divided between 'individuals of color' and those who identify as 'White," according to a summary of the complaint.
Hannah Dillow, a spokesperson for Evanston-Skokie School District 65, said in an email to USA TODAY that district officials were told that they were under investigation by the U.S. Department of Education on May 1.
Dillow said that the teacher's complaint misrepresented the district's "lawful and important professional learning and student-focused initiatives that are designed to advance the work of ensuring that ALL students have access and opportunity to a robust, high-quality education."
The district hopes for a "just and expeditious resolution" with the Education Department's OCR, Dillow said.
Trump gave schools 2 weeks to ban DEI. Lawyers say it's not that simple.
Why states rejected Trumps DEI directive
Some states and education groups have decried the anti-DEI in education directive in court.
On April 25, 19 state attorneys general filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Education Department, as well as Secretary of Education Linda McMahon and Trainor, calling the directive issued in the April 3 memo "unlawful and unconstitutional."
They argued the threat from the Trump administration to pull their funding if they didn't oblige was "subjective and illegal punishment for not acceding to an agenda to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion of any kind in schools."
The Education Department and its staff "have acted to unlawfully imperil more than $13.8 billion that are spent to educate our youth," their suit claims.
Any loss of federal funding for refusing to cut DEI programs could be "catastrophic" for students, the suit adds, because the states rely on federal dollars to fund schools and won't have a replacement for the money if that's cut.
"For instance, loss of special education funding would devastate schools and districts' abilities to serve students with disabilities," the lawsuit reads.
The Education Department did not respond to an inquiry from USA TODAY about the states' lawsuit.
Special education experts Worry about students with disabilities post-Education Department
In the meantime, several states have continued with DEI programming.
New York state officials have said they will not comply with the Trump administration's directives.
'We understand that the current administration seeks to censor anything it deems 'diversity, equity & inclusion,'' wrote Daniel Morton-Bentley, counsel and deputy commissioner of the state Department of Education, in a letter to the federal Education Department. 'But there are no federal or [New York] State laws prohibiting the principles of DEI.'
That means New York City Public Schools' mandated Black Studies curriculum program for all students will continue, for example.
Many other states have shared wavering commitment to continuing programs that incorporate diversity, equity and inclusion.
The states that refused to comply could be protected from losing their federal funding – at least for now.
On April 24, a New Hampshire judge and two other federal judges temporarily banned the Trump administration from pulling federal funding from schools that refused to cut diversity, equity and inclusion programming.
On Feb. 14, the Education Department sent a memo to school officials with a directive to "ensure that their policies and actions comply with existing civil rights law."
The National Education Association and its New Hampshire chapter and the American Civil Liberties Union and its New Hampshire and Massachusetts chapters responded with a lawsuit against the federal department and its head staffers.
The groups argued that the directive was on overstep for the Education Department, vague and a violation of teachers' rights.
U.S. District Court Judge Landya McCafferty said the Education Department's directive did not specifically define what kind of program the administration considers to be a DEI program that is in violation of the Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Trump administration Gives states 10 days to certify they've ended DEI in schools
Students bring the debate to court
Some schools in states that have not objected to the Education Department's anti-DEI directive have removed books that contain information about racial and social justice or cut programs that help LGBTQ+ and other marginalized students, leading one group of kids and parents to file a lawsuit against their schools.
The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit against the Department of Defense Education Activity on behalf of 12 children of active duty service members. They said their schools are "quarantining library books and whitewashing curricula in (their) civilian schools" and have "systemically removed books, altered curricula, and canceled events."
Those include academic materials about slavery, Native American history, LGBTQ+ identities and history, preventing sexual harassment and abuse and portions of AP Psychology curriculum, according to the lawsuit.
Michael O'Day, a spokesperson for the agency that runs schools for children of military personnel, said it does not comment on pending litigation.
Natalie Tolley, a parent of three students in these schools, said her children and their peers "deserve access to books that both mirror their own life experiences and that act as windows that expose them to greater diversity."
'Learning is a sacred and foundational right that is now being limited for students in DoDEA schools,' she wrote. 'The implementation of these EOs, without any due process or parental or professional input, is a violation of our children's right to access information that prevents them from learning about their own histories, bodies, and identities.
Contact Kayla Jimenez at kjimenez@usatoday.com. Follow her on X at @kaylajjimenez.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
a minute ago
Groups urge US colleges to end campus surveillance to protect protesters
NEW YORK -- A coalition of more than 30 privacy and civil rights groups called on U.S. universities Thursday to dismantle campus surveillance and data collection, to protect student protesters and others from government retaliation. The demands, issued in a letter sent to leaders of 60 major universities and colleges, come as President Donald Trump has pressed schools to crack down on alleged antisemitism and take a harder line on demonstrations. But the groups said it is essential that universities resist that pressure, including threats to millions of dollars in federal research grants, to preserve the academic freedom and rights to expression of their students, faculty and others. 'We are open-eyed to the financial pressure that all campuses are under,' said Golnaz Fakhimi, legal director for Muslim Advocates, a civil rights group that has counseled students who participated in pro-Palestinian protests and which joined in signing the letter. 'But we think this is the moment for all campuses to hunker down' and hold the line against government interference. In their letter, the groups called on university leaders to refuse to cooperate with law enforcement agencies seeking to surveil, detain or deport students, and demanded they do more to secure and delete sensitive data. The letter also asked that schools reject restrictions on masks worn by some student protesters to conceal their identities, work to prevent doxxing and dismantle campus surveillance systems. 'Without immediate action, surveillance tools and the data they amass will be used to supercharge the virulent attacks on campus communities,' says the letter, coordinated by the group Fight for the Future. It was signed by 32 groups, including Amnesty International USA, the Electronic Privacy Information Center and the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. Several colleges introduced new security measures and protest guidelines following a wave of pro-Palestinian campus protests in spring 2024. The letter was sent to leaders of 60 schools, including Yale, the University of Michigan and Columbia, which last month agreed in a deal with the Trump administration to pay more than $220 million to restore federal research money that was canceled in the name of combating antisemitism on campus. 'Surveillance does not make a university safer,' said Will Owen of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, which also signed the letter. 'It chills free speech, endangers students who speak out against injustice and it's really essential for campuses to protect their communities from the threat.'
USA Today
a minute ago
- USA Today
Trump's GOP on verge of big Texas win, but battle for power is only starting: 5 takeaways
Trump's Texas fight is aimed at giving the GOP an advantage in 2026 and a lame-duck president more power while in office. Democrats have other plans. A partisan battle in Texas over who holds power in Washington during the final two years of President Donald Trump's second term has unfurled into a nationwide debate drawing in top political figures as voters brace for another divisive election in 2026. The Lone Star State's GOP lawmakers are poised to send new congressional maps to Republican Gov. Greg Abbott on Aug. 21 that Trump and his allies hope will give them a strategic advantage in holding onto their majority in the U.S. House of Representatives. But the fight in Austin has spread beyond the state's borders and created significant uncertainty about who will be in position to govern during the second half of the Trump administration and after the next race for the White House. 'Game on,' New York Gov. Kathy Hochul wrote Aug. 20 in a social media post. She is one of several Democratic leaders considering their own steps like the Texas Republicans to re-draw congressional district borders inside their state. Here are five takeaways on the fast-spreading redistricting wars: Republicans have the upper hand if the redistricting war expands. States typically redo their congressional boundaries for voters every decade, specifically in the two years that follow a new census. But Trump has encouraged redistricting to happen ahead of the 2026 U.S. House elections. His motivation? The tendency of the party in the White House to lose seats in the U.S. House during the congressional elections that happen between presidential elections. Recent examples include the 1994, 2010, 2018 and 2022 political cycles. Trump and the GOP are hoping to break that trend or increase their 219-212 U.S. House majority through states with Republican legislatures that can draw congressional maps. By contrast, many Democratic states have passed laws and constitutional amendments creating independent commissions to draw their congressional district maps instead of politicians. That's part of why states such as Missouri and Indiana have discussed redistricting for Republican advantage, but the Democratic stronghold of Washington has ruled it out completely. Additionally, Ohio needs to re-draw its own congressional maps under a constitutionally-mandated process that would happen regardless of today's political climate, and Florida has created a special committee to re-draw congressional maps. Taken together, that means that there are three high-population states actively pursuing Republican seats, and so far California is the only major state likely to redistrict for Democrats ahead of 2026. A legal fight over the new Texas maps is brewing What's happening this week in Texas won't be the final say on whether the maps are permanent. That's for the courts to decide, though fights like this can take years to work their way through the system. Both Democrats and Republicans previewed their legal arguments during the Texas legislature's Aug. 20 House floor debate that ended in the House's approval of the Republican-favored new maps. Democratic lawmakers accused their GOP colleagues of 'packing' Hispanic voters into some districts and 'cracking' or 'diluting' their representation. Those are all key terms referring to practices that opponents have used when challenging maps in the past. They also asked Republicans whether they drew maps based on voters' Hispanic ethnicity since race-based gerrymandering is still illegal. Texas state Rep. Todd Hunter, the Republican author of the bill that changes the maps, explained that an outside law firm drew the maps, not members of the legislature or their in-house staff. He said he asked the firm to re-draw the maps to improve his party's 'political performance' in the state, using a term that he said was backed up by a recently decided federal court case. Hunter used the term repeatedly during hours of questioning by Democrats. Americans still don't like gerrymandering Americans haven't historically liked it when politicians draw maps in their favor, but they may support the practice when it benefits the party they agree with. A nationwide Reuters/Ipsos poll that ran from Aug. 13 to 18 found that a small majority of respondents thought the ongoing redistricting plans were 'bad for democracy,' and Democrats were more likely to think this than Republicans. A poll by the market research firm YouGov that ran Aug. 1 to 4 found that three-quarters of adults saw it as a 'major problem' when states draw maps to intentionally favor one party, and another one-fifth saw it as a 'minor problem.' These proportions, too, higher among Democrats and lower among Republicans. But in California, where Democratic lawmakers wants voters to decide in a Nov. 4 special election whether to redraw their own maps in favor of Democrats, a majority of voters support the initiative. The proposal has support from 57% of California voters, according to Gov. Gavin Newsom's own polling, as reported by Axios, including overwhelming support from Democrats and overwhelming opposition from Republicans. A Politico-UC Berkeley Citrin Center poll of nationwide voters that ran through Aug. 20 found about one-third of respondents said Democrats in California should 'fight back' with their own maps. That broke down to almost two-thirds of Democrats, one-third of independents, and about one-tenth of Republicans. New Democrats are getting their time in the spotlight Americans are seeing new faces emerge from the Democratic Party as they make national headlines fighting back against often better-known Texas Republicans. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, widely seen as a frontrunner for his party's presidential nomination in 2028, is one of them. His decision to go toe-to-toe with Texas and leverage his position in the only state with more congressional seats than the Lone Star State has meant an introduction to Americans all over the country and a national spotlight on his ideas. Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, one of the names floated for vice president in 2024, got his name out there when he hosted Texas Democrats who fled their state for nearly two weeks. But the ongoing fight has also highlighted what anti-gerrymandering advocates have called an unfair map tilted toward Democrats in Illinois. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, who says she wants to retaliate against Texas, is also gaining some attention. Another new face is Texas Rep. Nicole Collier of Fort Worth, who slept on the floor of the legislature. Texas Republican leaders have been requiring the Democratic lawmakers who broke quorum earlier this month to sign permission slips to leave the chamber and have a state police escort follow them around 24 hours a day to make sure they don't attempt to leave the state again. 'Today is not the end,' Collier said after the House passed the bill Aug. 20. 'It is the beginning, the start of a new Democratic party where we won't back down. … And we will push and push and push until we take over this country.' Barack Obama, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump are all involved Trump kicked off the firestorm when he called on Texas lawmakers to redraw the maps and provide five more Republican-leaning congressional districts. Now he's going toe-to-toe with Democratic Party standard bearers who have come into the fight. Former President Barack Obama posted on X that the attempt to re-draw districts in Texas was an 'assault on democracy,' and praised Texas Democrats. Now he's endorsed Newsom's plan to redistrict California's congressional maps in retaliation. Former Vice President Kamala Harris also called Collier while she stayed in the legislature: 'You really are inspiring so many people, and I just want you to know that you are among those who history will reveal to have been heroes of this moment. So you just stay strong and do what you are doing.' Harris ruled out a run for governor of her home state of California in 2026, leaving Americans to wonder whether she'll run for president in 2028. Contributing: Kathryn Palmer, USA TODAY
USA Today
a minute ago
- USA Today
Rainbow crosswalk removed at Pulse nightclub memorial amid Trump's street art crackdown
A rainbow-colored crosswalk near where 49 people were killed in a mass shooting at the gay nightclub Pulse has been painted over, said officials in Orlando, Florida, amid a push from the Trump administration to remove street art with 'political messages.' In a post on X, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis responded to criticism of the move by saying, "We will not allow our state roads to be commandeered for political purposes." The Florida Department of Transportation did not immediately respond to a request for comment from USA TODAY. Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer said in a statement Aug. 21 that he was "devastated" to learn the crosswalk had been removed in the middle of the night. He said the crosswalk was part of the larger memorial and had been created with the permission from the state's transportation department. "This callous action of hastily removing part of a memorial to what was at the time our nation's largest mass shooting, without any supporting safety data or discussion, is a cruel political act," he said. The news comes as Republican-led states have taken up the Trump administration's directive to crack down on what it has described as politically-charged street art. On July 1, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy issued a letter giving states 50 days to evaluate intersections and crosswalks as part of a "nationwide roadway safety initiative." The letter said that intersections and crosswalks need to be "kept free from distractions," including "political messages of any nature" and "artwork." This summer, the Florida Department of Transportation released a memo saying local governments could jeopardize state funding if they did not immediately remove street signs with 'social, political, or ideological messages.' The memo applied to crosswalks, bicycle symbols and other road surfaces. Since the directives went into place, cities across Florida and the nation have prepared to remove street art being targeted by the federal government. Crosswalks and street murals gained popularity during the pandemic and especially in the wake of the killing of George Floyd, which fueled the installation of large murals reading "Black Lives Matter" on city streets across the country. The rainbow colors were added to the crosswalk outside the Pulse nightclub in 2017, according to the Orlando Sentinel, a year after a gunman walked into the gay nightclub and fatally shot 49 people and wounded 53 others. It was the nation's deadliest mass shooting until a year later when a gunman killed 60 people at a country music festival in Las Vegas. Pulse survivor, state Democrats decry rainbow crosswalk removal A survivor of the deadly shooting as well as state Democrats were quick to condemn the action. "The cowards who feel threatened by our lives should feel lucky they didn't have to bury the ones they love — then watch the state come & desecrate their memory," said Brandon Wolf, a Pulse survivor and activist, in a statement on X. Florida Sen. Carolos Guiermos Smith, a Democrat, called the removal of Pride colors from the memorial of a mass shooting that killed many members of the local LGBTQ+ community "ridiculously short sighted" and "bigoted." "I cannot believe that the DeSantis administration has engaged in this hostile act against the city of Orlando," he said. "They have insulted the families and survivors of this horrific tragedy." He said he hopes the city of Orlando paints the colors back onto the street and sues the state for "vandalizing their poperty without their consent." Florida Rep. Anna Eskamani, D-Orlando, said the rainbow colors are not a political statement and instead "sparked joy and showed our love for all people."
