CCS board says district complies with racial discrimination law as U.S. threatens funding
Columbus City Schools has approved a resolution saying it was already compliant with racial discrimination laws in response to a U.S. Department of Education order requiring schools to certify they are compliant or risk federal funding.
On April 3, the U.S. Department of Education sent a letter to all state departments of education, informing them that they must collect signed certification letters from their state's public school districts verifying compliance with its definition of racial discrimination laws.
The due date for certifying compliance is April 18.
In a brief meeting April 17, the board voted unanimously to send the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce (ODEW) a copy of the resolution stating that the Columbus City school board has "already affirmed its compliance" under Title VI and other nondiscrimination laws in grant applications and "enforces comprehensive nondiscrimination policies consistent with applicable law."
In a statement she read during the meeting, Board Vice President Jennifer Adair said that district schools "have been and will remain in compliance" with the law.
"Our district and community have always been committed to creating and sustaining supportive spaces for all of our students, staff, and families, and we remain committed to that work," Adair said in a prepared release.
Title VI is a portion of federal law that prohibits discrimination based on race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance, including public schools. The district said the certification asks districts to acknowledge that they will comply with Title VI and "the U.S. Department of Education's recently expanded interpretation of Title VI, as outlined in a recent 'Dear Colleague Letter.'"
The consequence for "illegal DEI practices," Adair said, is districts losing federal funding. According to the ODEW, the CCS district received more than $255 million from the federal government last year, amounting to 22% of district revenue.
"As Columbus City Schools is in compliance with federal law, the school district remains eligible for federal funding," Adair said in her statement.
In February, the U.S. Department of Education said in a letter that schools must stop considering race in "decisions pertaining to admissions, hiring, promotion, compensation, financial aid, scholarships, prizes, administrative support, discipline, housing, graduation ceremonies, and all other aspects of student, academic, and campus life," The Dispatch previously reported.
The letter's basis was built on the U.S. Supreme Court's 2023 decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which overturned the use of race-conscious admissions practices at colleges and universities.
The district also said in its resolution that it "is unaware of any authority that the USDOE has to demand that it agree to an interpretation of a judicial decision or change the terms and conditions of the CCS Board's receipt of federal funds without formal administrative process."
In her statement, Adair said that public school districts were asked to confirm that they are not engaging in any 'illegal DEI practices,' but added that "the term is undefined in the certification." The resolution says that the requested certification is vague and ambiguous where it states that 'certain DEI practices can violate federal law,' without defining 'diversity, equity, and inclusion practices.'
Dayton City Schools voted April 17 not to sign the letter, The Dayton Daily News reported. The Connecticut State Department of Education said April 16 that it would not sign the certification.
Cole Behrens covers K-12 education and school districts in central Ohio. Have a tip? Contact Cole at cbehrens@dispatch.com or connect with him on X at @Colebehr_report
This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: CCS board to U.S.: We're already following anti-discrimination law
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
‘Pride Act' aims to protect Ohio parents with LGBTQ+ children
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — An Ohio lawmaker said her new parental rights bill coinciding with Pride Month is designed to combat the 'hostile environment' fostered by anti-LGBTQ+ legislation. House Bill 327, the 'Parents Rights for Inclusion, Diversity and Equity' Act (PRIDE Act), would protect Ohio parents' access to evidence-based medical and behavioral health care, hygiene care like menstrual care products, and educational opportunities for their children 'that are reflective of and inclusive of all students.' Out in Ohio: Stonewall Columbus gets ready for Pride 2025 'Most of all, parents have the right to raise their children in an inclusive, respectful, and accepting environment which honors their children's rights to freedoms of speech and expression,' the bill states. Rep. Karen Brownlee (D-Symmes Township), H.B. 327's primary sponsor, argues the act is needed given the anti-LGBTQ+ bills passed by the Statehouse that she said 'take away the rights of parents who raise LGBTQ kids.' Brownlee pointed to the 'Parents' Bill of Rights,' legislation requiring schools to notify parents of changes in a student's mental, emotional or physical health. Opponents argue the measure will result in the 'outing' of LGBTQ+ students, and cite a crisis hotline that said it received an increase in calls from Ohio youth within hours after the bill was signed into law in January. 'Parents rights have been a particular focus for the super majority over the past few years and, coupled with their targeting of LGBTQ youth, it's created a hostile environment for many of our young people and the adults who take care of them,' Brownlee said during a June 3 news conference. Republicans have long said the 'Parents' Bill of Rights' ensures parents are making decisions for their children, not the government. Gov. Mike DeWine told reporters in January that the bill provides a path for parents to be informed about what's going on in their child's life. Marysville, Westerville LGBTQ+ groups rally Pride funds as businesses pull support '[Parents are] the first teachers, they're the best teachers, and that's very, very important,' DeWine said, noting that he does not see the bill as harming LGBTQ+ students. Brownlee listed several other Ohio anti-LGBTQ+ measures, like requiring academic institutions to set separate bathrooms based on students' 'biological sex.' Columbus City Schools said this law is why the district reverted students' names to those reflected on birth certificates and rescinded its trans and gender variant student policy in February. The mother of two children who identify within the LGBTQ+ community, Brownlee said LGBTQ+ youth are owed 'the same rights, freedoms and access as any other young person' and that she and her husband deserve the 'same rights as other parents to raise their children in a safe and supportive Ohio.' 'When our kids came out to us, we were scared, out of fear for our kids wellness, safety and future here in the state of Ohio,' said Brownlee. 'The continued bullying of our youth is a losing fight. Let's stop fighting with our kids. Let's stop creating manufactured cultural wars that hurt them. Instead, let's listen to them.' List: 2025 Pride Month events, festivals in central Ohio Brownlee announced the act during a news conference marking Pride Month with other Statehouse Democrats and LGBTQ+ advocates. Sen. Nickie Antonio (D-Lakewood), Ohio's first openly gay Statehouse lawmaker, touted her new bill to mark 'Love Makes a Family Week,' after Republican legislators introduced plans to designate a month celebrating 'natural families.' Antonio also recently reintroduced proposals to ban anti-LGBTQ+ conversion therapy and discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community. Reps. Anita Somani (D-Dublin) and Eric Synenberg (D-Beachwood) announced the reintroduction of the 'Marriage Equality Act,' a House Joint Resolution to codify same-sex and interracial marriage. If passed by the Statehouse, the act would place a constitutional amendment on the November 2026 ballot, providing Ohioans the chance to enshrine marriage equality into Ohio's constitution. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
The California Mom at the Center of Trump's Crackdown on School Gender Policies
In 2022, near the end of her youngest child's freshman year in high school, a Southern California mom spotted an unfamiliar male name on an online biology assignment: Toby. When she asked the teacher about it, he shrugged it off as a nickname. While scrolling through Instagram, the mother noticed her child's friends also called the teen Toby. So she began digging for further evidence of something she had started to suspect — that the ninth grader, with the school's support, was transitioning from female to male. 'I'm like 'Hey, you can't deny it anymore' ' said Lydia, who did not want to use her last name out of a desire to protect her child, now 17. Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter The school's principal, following guidance that allows students to decide whether to inform parents of their gender identity, refused to meet with her. But she found clues elsewhere — an alternate ID card with the name Toby stuffed in a backpack, and emails between district staff discussing which name to use in the yearbook. Over time, she discovered her child's transition was an open secret at school — one kept by staff, administrators, a district equity officer, the superintendent, even the president of the local teachers union. 'They were strategizing against me,' Lydia said. Her experience now lies at the center of a major push by the U.S. Department of Education to clamp down on policies that allow schools to conceal changes in students' gender identity from parents. In a March press release announcing an investigation into California, Education Secretary Linda McMahon said teachers and counselors should stay out of 'consequential decisions' about children's sexual identities. Officials are probing similar allegations in Maine and Washington state. In an unprecedented move, the department is threatening to pull millions of dollars in federal education funding from all three states. But it's putting all schools on notice. In guidance, federal officials warned states and districts that their support of student 'gender plans' had become a 'priority concern.' For educators, the message was as stunning as its rationale. The department is relying on a novel, and according to some critics, incorrect, interpretation of a 50-year-old student privacy law known as the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, or FERPA. Related The law is typically used to safeguard student records and allow parents to inspect them. But it doesn't compel schools to inform parents how their children identify in the classroom. If schools link a record to a student, 'the parent has a right of access to it if they request it,' said LeRoy Rooker, who oversaw compliance with FERPA at the Education Department for over 20 years. But 'the school doesn't have to be proactive and call and say 'Hey, we did this.' ' Department leaders appear to be stretching the reach of the law in an attempt to bolster conservative arguments that schools are meddling in deeply personal decisions that should be left to parents. In response to the Washington investigation, state Superintendent Chris Reykdal said in a statement that his state is the 'latest target in the administration's dangerous war against individuals who are transgender' and that officials are twisting student privacy laws 'to undermine the health, safety and well-being of students.' To Julie Hamill, a Los Angeles-area attorney who asked the department to investigate, Lydia's story demonstrates that a law designed to keep parents informed is now working against them. Related 'The parents are in the dark,' said Hamill of the conservative California Justice Center. 'Parents will not know student records are being withheld unless they've somehow discovered it on their own.' In tackling the role of schools in student gender transitions, the department is dipping into one of the more emotionally fraught issues in the culture war, one that President Donald Trump campaigned on and weaponized once he was back in the White House. In one of his first executive orders, Trump said, without evidence, that schools are 'steering students toward surgical and chemical mutilation.' In March, McMahon met with 'detransitioners' who reversed their gendering processes. She criticized the 'lengths schools would go to in order to hide this information from parents.' 'The parents are in the dark.' Julie Hamill, California Justice Center To many experts, the administration's scrutiny is out of proportion to the scope of the issue. In the overwhelming majority of cases, schools and students are just navigating preferred names and pronouns, and even those situations are infrequent. Multiple sources estimate that about 3% of teens are transgender. Far fewer are likely to approach school officials with a request for a name or pronoun change, said Brian Dittmeier, the director of Public Policy at GLSEN, which advocates for LGBTQ students. Loretta Whitson, executive director of the California Association of School Counselors, said it is 'rare' for school officials to discuss transitioning with students, and that her group's members say the only gender plans they've completed were done at the request of parents. At the same time, most Americans agree that schools should get parents' permission before changing a child's pronouns in school records. Polls in California and New Jersey found that roughly three-quarters of adults support mandatory parental notification. Lydia's story exemplifies that loss of trust in the system. The artist and former ballerina she thought of as her daughter began identifying as transgender upon entering Academy of the Canyons, a public high school in Santa Clarita, an upscale suburb of Los Angeles. Homeschooled since kindergarten, the teen wanted to pursue art and take advantage of options in their district. The school is located on a college campus where students can attend post-secondary classes while earning their high school diplomas. 'I thought it would be a good opportunity,' Lydia said. In the fall of 2021, while cleaning the ninth grader's bedroom, Lydia flipped through some art journals. But instead of schoolwork, she found disturbing sketches of bloody body parts and notes about wanting a chest binder, top surgery and a new name. 'Shocked and scared' that her child might be suicidal, her thoughts turned immediately to a friend of her son's who'd recently taken his own life, apparently without warning. 'No suicide notes. No threats,' she recalled. 'The ones that never use it as a weapon are the ones that follow through.' She began searching for answers online. Initially, she only found sites about supporting a child's transition — advice she rejected. Unlike many parents in her shoes, she's neither conservative nor religious. In fact, she quipped, an outsider might have assumed she was 'the poster mom for transitioning my kid.' Related She described her own parents — a Black father and a Jewish mother — as 'hippie artists' who raised her to be a 'free thinker' without religion. Lydia's mother changed her name to Michael in the 1960s because it was easier to make it in the art world with a man's name. A lifelong Democrat, Lydia voted against a ban on gay marriage when it was on the state ballot in 2008. But when it came time to have kids of her own, she embraced more conservative values, wanting to 'protect their childhood.' Speaking as a liberal, Lydia said, 'I really should have been like 'Yeah, sure, explore your transgenderism.'' But instead, she did the opposite, taking a hard line against the shift. 'I said ' I love you, but I'm not affirming you. This is not real.' ' That view belies a scientific consensus that some children can identify differently as young as 3 or 4. Other research shows children can experience strong distress due to gender dysphoria — feeling that their sex was misassigned at birth — starting at age 7. 'I love you, but I'm not affirming you.' Lydia, California mom In attempting to explain what was happening with her child, Lydia turned to a controversial theory of researcher Lisa Littman. In a 2018 paper, the former Brown University scientist described the rise in rapid onset gender dysphoria among adolescents as a 'contagion' driven by peer pressure and social media. 'I did what every parent did during the pandemic — let their kid be online way too much,' Lydia said. Littman's research methods drew criticism from her own university and the broader research community because she based her conclusions largely on reports from self-selecting parents recruited from online forums that were unsupportive, or at least skeptical, of gender transition. They included 4thwavenow, which labels itself as 'a community of people who question the medicalization of gender-atypical youth.' Littman later published an amended version of the paper, responding to the controversy and clarifying that the behavior she observed did not amount to a formal diagnosis. Her work, however, continues to drive conservative calls to eliminate trans-inclusive policies in school and inspire the views of the Trump administration — and Lydia. 'There is no such thing as a trans child,' Lydia said. It is a debate where the voices of kids directly affected are often absent. J.J. Koechell, a Wisconsin 20-year-old, transitioned in sixth grade after a suicide attempt. He now advocates for other LGBTQ students he says are 'entitled to some privacy and consent.' 'They're trying to figure things out and they don't want to get it wrong. To disappoint parents is a lot of weight on a struggling youth.' He watched the school district he attended, Kettle-Moraine, ban Pride flags and 'safe spaces.' In 2023, as the result of a lawsuit, leaders stopped allowing staff to refer to students by different names and pronouns without parents' permission. Some staff members retired or resigned over the controversy, including a librarian Koechell trusted. Koechell dropped out and is now finishing high school online. 'My teachers were all I had at school. I didn't have any friends,' he said. 'Coming out was a matter of life and death for me. My identity wasn't and still isn't optional.' Protecting students like Koechell is the purpose of a new California law — Support Academic Futures and Educators for Today's Youth, also known as the 'SAFETY Act.' It prohibits schools from requiring staff to disclose a child's gender identity to their parents. In announcing the Department of Education's investigation of the state, Secretary McMahon said the law 'appears to conflict with FERPA.' But GLSEN's Dittmeier highlighted that the legislation still requires schools to comply with the federal privacy law — and honor parents' requests for records. 'Coming out was a matter of life and death for me. My identity wasn't and still isn't optional.' J.J. Koechell, trans student advocate One department staffer is worried where the investigation could lead. 'This is irregular, based on our history — to take up an allegation [with] no official complaint, but one that is motivated by an attorney group that is bending the department's ear about something,' said an employee familiar with the case who asked to speak anonymously to protect his job. He said the administration's goal is to pressure states and districts into rescinding policies that allow students to decide when to go public with their gender identity. 'This will result in districts adopting forced outing and will result in harming children.' In California, the debate over parental notification was raging long before the current controversy. In 2023, police removed state Superintendent Tony Thurmond from a meeting in the Chino Valley Unified School District after a tense exchange with board members over the district's parental notification policy. He warned the board that their policy could 'put our students at risk because they may not be in homes where they can be safe.' The state later filed a lawsuit against the district as well as others that passed similar measures. Continuing its battle with Thurmond, Chino Valley is now suing the state over the SAFETY Act, saying that minors are 'too young to make life-altering decisions' without their parents. National data show that less than a third of trans and nonbinary students say their home is gender-affirming. A 2021 study found that transgender adolescents assigned female at birth were more likely than other teens to report being psychologically traumatized by parents or other adults in the home. 'There have been kids whose parents have physically abused them and kicked them out of the house when this information is disclosed,' said Amelia Vance, president of the Public Interest Privacy Center and an expert on student privacy. Even before California passed the SAFETY Act, the state education agency and the California School Boards Association urged schools to get students' permission before informing parents about changes in their gender identity. When officials at Hart Unified High School District refused to meet with Lydia, they cited a state law that protects trans students' access to programs, sports and facilities that align with their gender identity. On the advice of an advocacy group, Lydia initially filed a public records request in search of a 'secret social transition' plan she believed Academy of the Canyons maintained. She also asked for communications between her child and teachers using the 'non-birth name.' The district turned her down. Contacted by The 74, Hart Unified spokeswoman Debbie Dunn declined to answer questions about the investigation or Lydia's experience, but said officials would 'continue to follow the laws and procedures applicable to the district.' In January 2023, Lydia spoke at a school board meeting about being shut out by the district. Her story caught the attention of Board Member Joe Messina, a conservative radio talk show host. 'She came up to the podium one night and she was crying,' he said. 'She looked at the superintendent and said, 'I've reached out to you. You've not called me back'. She looked to the trustee who handles her area and she said, 'I've left you four messages. You've never called me back.' ' 'There have been kids whose parents have physically abused them and kicked them out of the house when this information is disclosed.' Amelia Vance, Public Interest Privacy Center Messina and Lydia talked after the meeting, and he connected her with the Pacific Justice Institute, a right-leaning law firm. He noted that the issue transcended their political differences. 'Lydia's a lifelong Democrat, and I'm an outspoken Republican,' Messina said. 'For her and I to come together — the rest of the world would say, 'What's wrong with you people?'' Even with advocates on her side, Lydia continued to face obstacles. For months, the Academy of the Canyons declined to release an autobiographical English essay written by her child under the name Toby. The district finally turned it over on advice from their lawyers. The essay revealed the child's trepidation about coming out to Lydia. The piece recounted a moment before the pandemic, when the student, then 11, broached the subject of being queer. Lydia said her child was first exposed to LGBTQ issues while participating in a homeschool theater group. 'The weather was overcast, and we were driving home from theater rehearsal,' the then-10th grader wrote. 'Once again summoning all my courage, I mentioned to her that one of my friends had confided in me about their attraction to girls, and that I too might be queer. Unfortunately, my mom's immediate response was dismissive and critical.' As parent-child confrontations often go, Lydia remembers it differently. She said she treated the declaration as a teachable moment.'We talked about what that word meant,' she said, 'and why I felt she had time as she grew up to really know what sexual orientation she would be.' In a memo, the district's lawyers also named the elephant in the room — that officials had been withholding the essay out of a desire to shield the child's shifting gender identity. 'In general, parents have the statutory right to review a student's classwork/homework,' the memo stated. 'This issue becomes clouded … if the classwork could reveal a student's gender identity/expression.' Despite refusing to accept that her child was transgender, Lydia said she tried to stay connected. In 2023, they attended over a dozen concerts together, seeing Hozier, Bastille and Penelope Scott — experiences that Lydia called 'part of the healing process.' The two went on a long-promised trip to Europe, during which Lydia gave her child an ultimatum: stop identifying as a boy or go back to being homeschooled. That fall, the school agreed to honor Lydia's wishes to cease social transitioning, but her child still resisted, asking teachers to continue using the name Toby. This time, the district let Lydia know. Lydia did not make her child available for an interview, saying 'she isn't ready to tell her side of the story.' Nearly two years later, she says her child, who graduated from high school last week, 'wants to put it all behind her.' While the teen identifies as a girl, the changes have been subtle. There are days when she dresses in what her mom called 'oversized, ugly boy shirts' and others when she does her makeup and wears more feminine clothes. Recently, she switched back to her birth name on all of her social media accounts. 'I get a little choked up,' Lydia said, 'but that's pretty huge.' The story might have ended there, but Lydia's two-minute plea to the Hart school board, shared across social media, reached other parent rights advocates just as Trump renewed his campaign for the White House. When the president took office, Hamill, with the California Justice Center, seized the opportunity to file a complaint with an administration guided by Project 2025, the right-wing Heritage Foundation's blueprint for the president's second term. Requiring schools to notify parents if a student changes their gender identity, which six states already do, is one of the tenets of the plan. Heritage expert Lindsey Burke, who joined the department Friday, also wants Congress to give FERPA more teeth by allowing parents to sue under the law. Currently, parents can only file a grievance with their state or the Education Department's privacy office — complaints that can languish for years. Privacy laws 'are a core part of [the administration's] arguments for how parental rights need to be respected and strengthened,' said Vance, the privacy expert. But the potential for lawsuits under FERPA, she added 'would be extremely messy and expensive for schools.' In April, the House education committee advanced a bill — the PROTECT Kids Act — that would require elementary and middle schools to secure parental consent before students change their pronouns or preferred names or use different bathrooms or locker rooms. The committee debate demonstrated the deep divisions over gender identity and how schools should accommodate LGBTQ students. Rep. Mark Takano, a California Democrat who is gay, offered a personal story. 'When I came out to my parents, it was at a time, place and manner of my own choosing,' he said. 'I would not have wanted anyone else to make that decision for me.' To Hamill, gender transition is much more than 'coming out' because it can lead to physical changes that some young adults later regret. Research shows that figure is about 1%, a fraction of those who undergo surgery. Even so, she said California's policies add up to an elaborate 'concealment scheme' that pits children against their parents. 'If you suspect the parents are abusive and they're going to harm the child, you have to report that to [child protective services],' she said. 'But the government cannot by default assume that every parent is harmful and is going to reject and hurt their children.'
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Harvard can't truly win its fight against Trump
Imagine a boxing match in which one fighter can block the blows of his opponent but isn't permitted to hit back. When struck by a low blow, the injured fighter may appeal, but the referee can only admonish the unscrupulous fighter to abide by the rules. He is not allowed to end the match by throwing in the towel — and his opponent is free to keep punching. This is the situation in which Harvard now finds itself. The Trump administration has accused Harvard University of tolerating antisemitism and implementing diversity, equity and inclusion policies that violate civil rights laws. On those tenuous grounds, the federal government has frozen or terminated billions in research funding, launched at least eight highly intrusive investigations, threatened to revoke the university's tax-exempt status and tried to end its ability to enroll international students. If a private actor illegally crippled Harvard's ability to operate, the university could ask a court to order the defendant to desist, award the institution attorneys' fees and costs and mandate monetary compensation for the harms it suffered. But the federal government has sovereign immunity, largely protecting it from suits and monetary damages. Harvard has already sued the government twice. The first lawsuit, filed in April, accuses the Trump administration of withholding billions in federal funding 'as leverage to gain control of academic decision making' in flagrant violation of the First Amendment and the procedural safeguards of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The second lawsuit, filed in May, challenges the government's revocation of Harvard's right to enroll international students 'without process or cause, to immediate and devastating effect for Harvard and more than 7,000 visa holders,' as another 'blatant violation of the First Amendment, the Due Process Clause, and the Administrative Procedure Act.' In both suits, Harvard seeks injunctions vacating the government's orders and reimbursement of its legal fees and costs. Just hours after Harvard filed its second lawsuit, the judge issued a temporary restraining order barring implementation of the edict prohibiting Harvard from enrolling international students. But neither lawsuit seeks — or can request — monetary compensation for the extraordinary harm Harvard is suffering at the government's hands. Harvard's research programs have been thrown into disarray, its reputation tarnished and, it argues, 'its ability to recruit and retain talent, secure future funding, and maintain its relationships with other institutions' significantly diminished. Harvard has been forced to allocate at least $250 million to salvage some of the research jeopardized by the government's funding freeze. The school has already spent huge amounts of time, energy and money responding to the government's many investigations and sweeping demands for information. And the fight is only in its early rounds. Although the Constitution does not explicitly address sovereign immunity, courts have held from the earliest days of the republic that the government cannot be sued without its consent. This principle is drawn from English common law, which assumed that 'the King can do no wrong.' As legal scholar Erwin Chemerinsky has observed, the effect of sovereign immunity is 'to ensure that some individuals who have suffered egregious harms will be unable to receive redress for their injuries.' Congress can waive the government's immunity from suit through laws such as the Administrative Procedure Act, which underpins most of Harvard's claims against the government. But while that law allows courts to declare certain government actions illegal and issue injunctive relief, it does not permit the award of monetary damages. The Federal Tort Claims Act allows plaintiffs to seek damages for certain negligent or wrongful acts by government officials, such as a car crash or sexual assault. But its waiver doesn't extend to acts involving the performance of 'a discretionary function or duty on the part of a federal agency or an employee of the Government, whether or not the discretion involved be abused.' The law is thus rendered useless to parties injured by government edicts or policies, however damaging or illegal. As the Supreme Court has noted, protecting the government from monetary damages for policy judgments 'prevents judicial 'second-guessing' of legislative and administrative decisions.' Sovereign immunity also reduces the risk that liability concerns will prevent government officials from taking sound but potentially costly actions. But monetary damages serve two important legal functions: they help compensate victims for their injuries, and, by leveling the playing field, they deter government officials from committing wrongful acts. Without the ability to obtain monetary compensation, Harvard can deflect some of the government's attacks through court orders, but it cannot be made whole for the harm done to its finances, its reputation and members of the campus community. Worse still, there is nothing to deter the government from continuing its assault. And some actions will be difficult to challenge in court, such as the government's threat to exclude Harvard from future research grants, and its recent decision to pause all international student visa interviews, an action that will harm hundreds of colleges and universities, including Harvard. And under legislation working its way through Congress, the school may end up paying roughly $850 million annually in endowment excise taxes. As much as some critics of Harvard may revel in watching America's oldest, richest and most influential university humbled, the country benefits enormously from an institution that has trained eight American presidents, produced 161 Nobel laureates and made countless life-changing discoveries in medicine, science and technology, earning 155 patents last year alone. Harvard's experience demonstrates how much the rule of law depends on those in power exercising that power with restraint and in the public interest. Harvard cannot win this fight. It is rigged. But that doesn't mean the university should not stay in the ring, litigate, mobilize its alumni, donors and friends, and enlist the support of other colleges and universities, hoping to remain standing long enough for a new Congress and administration to stop the carnage. And, to that end, to make sure voters understand that when government officials are hell bent on punishing their political enemies (real and imagined) regardless of how large the collateral damage, just about every American loses. Glenn C. Altschuler is the Thomas and Dorothy Litwin Emeritus Professor of American Studies at Cornell University. David Wippman is emeritus president of Hamilton College. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
