KY education department certifies its compliance with Trump dictates on civil rights
Kentucky Education Commissioner Robbie Fletcher (Kentucky Lantern photo by McKenna Horsley)
The Kentucky Department of Education (KDE) has signed an agreement with the federal government to have no diversity, equity and inclusion programs in public schools
However, KDE has not paused or suspended any of its existing programs since receiving a request from the U.S. Department of Education to complete a form certifying its compliance with Trump administration interpretations of civil rights law. Kentucky Education Commissioner Robbie Fletcher also said the state department will continue working with its partners 'to build an education system that is responsive and relentlessly focused on student success.'
In a letter to superintendents sent last weekend, Fletcher wrote that the U.S. Education Department's certification form 'is not without issues,' but he is still 'confident that through our statewide commitment to providing opportunity and access for every student, we can advance towards meeting the needs and ensuring the success of each student in Kentucky's public schools.'
According to the federal agency's form, 'any violation of Title VI — including the use of Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion ('DEI') programs to advantage one's race over another — is impermissible' and using 'certain DEI practices can violate federal law.' The form outlines possible consequences — such as losing federal funding or facing a federal lawsuit — for a state or local education agency that protects a DEI program. Title VI of the 1963 Civil Rights Act It prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color and national origin in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance.
The U.S. Education Department asked the Kentucky department to distribute the certification forms to local school district officials for their signatures. Fletcher's letter said all Kentucky school districts have 'previously assured KDE of such compliance' and will do so annually in the future.
'As previously recommended, school districts should consult with board counsel on whether the district will sign the Certification Form,' Fletcher wrote.
The federal department's targeting of DEI practices comes as Republicans at the national and state levels have pushed to roll back such measures, particularly in education. The GOP-controlled Kentucky General Assembly recently passed a law banning DEI programs at Kentucky public universities and colleges. Shortly after he assumed office in January, President Donald Trump signed an executive order aimed at eliminating DEI programs within the federal government.
Backlash against DEI programs has grown since the U.S. Supreme Court struck down affirmative action in higher education admissions in 2023. The ruling is cited in the form the U.S. Department of Education is asking school officials to sign..
In general, DEI initiatives focus on supporting marginalized people in areas where they have been historically excluded.
The U.S. Education Department previously threatened to rescind federal funding for schools in a February letter if they use DEI, or race-conscious practices, in admissions, programming, training, hiring, scholarships and other resources for students.
In a statement to the Kentucky Lantern, Fletcher said he is 'committed to ensuring that every student—regardless of race, background, language, socioeconomic status, or zip code — has access to a high-quality education and vibrant learning opportunities to succeed.'
'That means removing barriers, expanding support for English learners, and providing all students with the resources they need to thrive,' Fletcher added. 'Our schools must be places where every child feels supported and challenged to reach their full potential. We will continue to work with educators, families, and communities to build an education system that is responsive and relentlessly focused on student success.'
Earlier this month, the U.S. Education Department sent a letter asking states and districts to provide certifications they were complying with the order within 10 days or risk losing federal funding. The department then delayed the deadline to sign its form until after April 24 following an agreement between it and groups suing the federal department over the directive. The National Education Association, a teachers union, and the American Civil Liberties Union are challenging the directive in court.
Kentucky's legislature has not outlawed DEI in public schools, although legislation was filed in the 2025 General Assembly to roll back such programs. Sen. Lindsey Tichenor, R-Smithfield, filed bills that would have prohibited DEI initiatives in Kentucky's public schools and state and local governments. Neither got a committee hearing.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
3 hours ago
- Bloomberg
Top Banker Vows Loyalty to DEI at Tokyo Pride Parade as Trump's Pushback Rages
The head of one of Japan's largest investment banks used the Tokyo Pride parade to strike a rare public stance on pushing ahead with diversity initiatives, as US President Donald Trump seeks to abolish such policies. Few Japanese corporate executives have taken a clear position on US efforts to roll back the diversity, equity and inclusion policies that had become common at global corporations, though many firms appear to have quietly maintained their initiatives.
Yahoo
15 hours ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - The ‘Trump did it' defense: Colleges' and companies' new excuse to roll back wokeness
'Trump made me do it.' Across the country, this is a virtual mantra being mouthed everywhere from businesses to higher education. Corporations are eliminating woke programs. Why? Trump did it. Universities are eliminating DEI offices and cracking down on campus extremism. Trump did it. Democratic politicians are abandoning far-left policies. Trump did it. For those who lack both courage or conviction, the claim of coercion is often the next best thing. The 'TDI defense' is born. Of course, they did not invent Trump, but they needed him. For years, schools like Harvard and Columbia ignored warnings about the rising antisemitism on campuses. They refused to punish students engaged in criminal conduct, including occupying and trashing buildings. These administrators did not want to risk being tagged by the far-left mob for taking meaningful action. Then the election occurred, and suddenly they were able to blame Trump for doing what they should have been doing all along. Administrators are now cracking down on extreme elements on campuses. At the same time, hundreds of schools are closing DEI offices around the country. Again, most are not challenging the Trump administration's orders on DEI or seeking to adopt more limited responses. They are all in with the move, while professing that they have little choice. In other words, schools are increasingly turning to TDI to end DEI. The legal landscape has changed with an administration committed to opposing many DEI programs as discriminatory and unlawful. However, it is the speed and general lack of resistance that is so notable. In most cases, the Trump administration did not have to ask twice. Trump seemed to 'have them at hello,' as if they were longing for a reason to reverse these trends. Many will continue to fight this fight surreptitiously. For example, shortly before the Trump election, the University of North Carolina System Board of Governors voted to ban DEI and focus on 'institutional neutrality.' Yet, even Administrators emboldened by the TDI defense are finding resistance in their ranks. For example, UNC Asheville Dean of Students Megan Pugh was caught on videotape, saying that eliminating these offices means nothing: 'I mean we probably still do anyway… but you gotta keep it quiet.' She added, 'I love breaking rules.' The Board, perhaps not feeling the same thrill, reportedly responded by firing her. The same pattern is playing out in businesses. Over the last few weeks, companies ranging from Amazon to IBM have removed references to DEI programs or policies. Bank of America explained, 'We evaluate and adjust our programs in light of new laws, court decisions, and, more recently, executive orders from the new administration.' Once established, these DEI offices tended to expand as an irresistible force within their institutions and companies. Full-time diversity experts demanded additional hirings and policies on hiring, promotion, and public campaigns. Since these experts were tasked with finding areas for 'reform,' their proposals were treated as extensions of that mandate. To oppose the reforms was to oppose the cause. While some executives and administrators supported such efforts, others simply lacked the courage to oppose them. No one wanted to be accused of being opposed to 'equity' or being racist, sexist, or homophobic. The results were continually expanding programs impacting every level of businesses and institutions. Then Trump showed up. Suddenly, these executives and administrators had an excuse to reverse this trend. They could also rely on court decisions that have undermined longstanding claims of advocates that favoring certain groups at the expense of others was entirely lawful. This week, the Supreme Court added to these cases with its unanimous ruling in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, to remove impediments to lawsuits by members of majority groups who are discriminated against. For many years, lower courts have required members of majority groups (white, male, or heterosexual) to shoulder an added burden before they could establish claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. In a decision written by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the court rejected that additional burden and ordered that everyone must be treated similarly under the law. Many commentators noted that the ruling further undermined the rationales for disparate treatment based on race or other criteria within DEI. In other words, more of these programs are likely to be the subject of federal investigations and lawsuits. Of course, if these executives and administrators were truly committed to the programs in principle, they could resolve to fight in the courts. The alternative is just to blame Trump and restore prior policies that enforce federal standards against all discriminatory or preferred treatment given to employees based on race, sex, religion, or other classifications. Former Vice President Hubert Humphrey once observed that 'to err is human. To blame someone else is politics.' That is evident among politicians. For years, many moderate Democrats voted to support far-left agendas during the Biden administration, lacking the courage or principles to oppose the radical wing of the Democratic Party. Now, some are coming forward to say that the party has 'lost touch with voters.' Rather than admit that their years of supporting these policies were wrong, they blame Trump and argue that the party must move toward the center to survive. The calculus is simple: You never act on principle when you can blame a villain instead. It is not a profile of courage but one of simple convenience. No need for admissions or responsibility — just TDI and done. Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and the author of 'The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
18 hours ago
- Yahoo
Corporate support for Pride is dwindling nationwide. In NC, it's a mixed bag
Pride Month has long been an occasion for companies and institutions to display their support for the LGBTQ+ community, whether it be for profit or for principle. It's often a trivial gesture, but it can have a meaningful impact for a community that had long been relegated to the shadows of society. But more recently, that support has waned amid a regressive political climate that has made many companies rethink their commitments to diversity, equity and inclusion. A survey conducted by the national risk management firm Gravity Research found that around 39% of companies said they would reduce their engagement around Pride Month this year. Some of the top reasons for the change were the Trump administration, conservative activists and conservative policymakers, the survey found. Major corporations, including Mastercard and Pepsi, have pulled their sponsorship of major Pride events or avoided the topic on social media. In North Carolina, the results are mixed. Take Lowe's, which is based in Mooresville. Lowe's hasn't yet acknowledged Pride Month on its social media — a marked difference from past years when it openly embraced the occasion. That's not unexpected, given that Lowe's has already announced an end to many of its DEI initiatives. Last year, the company said it would no longer participate in surveys conducted by LGBTQ+ groups and ended its support of outside events like festivals, parades and fairs. (Lowe's had previously been a longtime supporter of Charlotte's annual Pride festival.) But surprising or not, it's reflective of a growing trend away from publicly embracing the LGBTQ+ community. Charlotte-based Bank of America also has remained quiet about Pride so far. In past years, Bank of America has been vocal about celebrating the occasion on social media and honoring its LGBTQ+ employees with the hashtag #BofAPride, but that support has been absent this year. Compare that with Truist, which posted in celebration of Pride on its Facebook and Instagram accounts. For North Carolina's professional sports teams, the results are mixed, too. While the Carolina Panthers and Charlotte Hornets both celebrated the start of Pride on social media, the Carolina Hurricanes have not. In fact, the team has remained largely silent about Pride since 2023 — the Hurricanes are one of just a handful NHL teams to not acknowledge it this year — a decision that has disappointed many fans who feel a simple acknowledgment of the occasion is not too much to ask. The same goes for the state's largest cities. The city of Charlotte posted on its social media accounts at the beginning of Pride, in addition to updating its profile picture to a rainbow version of the city's crown logo. The cities of Raleigh and Greensboro, however, did not. This move toward silence comes at a time when things like Pride celebrations and flags are under attack from lawmakers across the state. Legislation has been introduced at the state level that would effectively ban the display of Pride flags in government buildings, while some counties have passed ordinances governing public events that some interpret as targeting Pride events or drag performances. Of course, a social media post is just that: a social media post. It's not going to defeat anti-LGBTQ legislation, or save gay kids from being bullied, or change the country's attitude towards transgender people — at least not on its own. From some companies, it's just a lot of empty words or glorified virtue signaling. But public support for any marginalized group can be meaningful, especially when it happens on a large scale. And when institutions cower in the face of political pressure to stay silent, they're just letting the bullies win. It makes real change all the more difficult. Ultimately, it's not the silence that is the problem. It's the fact that the silence is new — a sudden absence of the public support and acceptance that existed before. It feels like another step backward during a time when progress feels like it's constantly stuck in reverse.
