Latest news with #CenterforBlackEducatorDevelopment
Yahoo
25-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Federal judge restricts Trump administration's efforts to withhold school funding based on DEI
April 24 (UPI) -- A federal judge on Thursday restricted the Trump administration from denying funds to public schools that participate in diversity, equity and inclusion programs. The ruling, issued by New Hampshire federal Judge Landya McCafferty, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, is limited to schools that participate with the plaintiffs in the case, the National Education Association and the Center for Black Educator Development. McCafferty said Trump's action would "cripple the operations of many educational institutions," and would constitute a violation of executive branch power in overseeing local school districts. The NEA is the nation's largest teachers union with more than 3 million members. "The Department's attempt to punish schools for acknowledging diversity, equity and inclusion is not only unconstitutional, but it's also extremely dangerous -- and functions as a direct misalignment with what we know to be just and future forward," Sharif El-Mekki, Center for Black Educator Development CEO and founder, said in a statement. "Today's decision is a critical step toward protecting the freedom to teach and the freedom to learn." The suit was filed after the Trump administration demanded that public schools in all 50 states not participate in programs that violate its interpretation of what constitutes a violation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The Education Department pushed back against the lawsuit, saying public schools in the United States have embraced "pervasive and repugnant race-based preferences," which "emanated throughout every facet of academia" and did so by holding the "false premise that the United States is built upon 'systemic and structural racism.'" The administration demanded that public schools comply with existing civil rights laws or risk losing potentially billions of dollars in federal aid earmarked for low-income students. In her ruling, McCafferty also said the Trump administration's definition of diversity, equity and inclusion is unlawful, and in "stark contrast to the dictionary definition of DEI." She added that the administration's stance is "inconsistent with the ordinary meaning of the phrase." Trump signed a flurry of executive orders in January that took aim at eliminating DEI programs at various institutions and government departments across the country.
Fox News
24-04-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
Federal judge partially blocks Trump's effort to deny funding to pro-DEI public schools
A federal judge in New Hampshire on Thursday blocked the Trump administration from cutting funding to public schools that maintain diversity programs, a setback to its broader crackdown on DEI. U.S. District Judge Landya McCafferty said the effort by Trump's Education Department to block federal funding to public schools that continue to promote diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs likely violates the First Amendment, presenting what she described as "textbook viewpoint discrimination." At issue is a memo sent by the Education Department this month to public schools nationwide, threatening to withhold Title I federal funds from public schools that continue to "unfairly" promote DEI views or programs. The effort sparked an immediate wave of concern, and lawsuits, across the country from education groups that cited the importance of Title I funds as a critical source of funding for many low-income public schools. The DEI-slashing effort was met with a wave of court challenges, including a lawsuit filed by the National Education Association, the group's New Hampshire affiliate chapter, and the Center for Black Educator Development, who challenged the case in New Hampshire's federal court. Two other U.S. courts are slated to hear similar challenges to the Education Department's effort, with one case in Washington, D.C., expected to be heard as early as this week. McCafferty's ruling stopped short of issuing a nationwide injunction to block the policy in all 50 states. Rather, it blocks the Trump administration from halting the disbursement of Title I funds to any schools that employ or contract with plaintiffs in the lawsuit. "The right to speak freely and to promote diversity of ideas and programs is ... one of the chief distinctions that sets us apart from totalitarian regimes," McCafferty said in her 82-page opinion, adding that the actions taken by the Education Department "threate[n] to erode these foundational principles." She also said the Trump administration failed to provide the court with a sufficient definition of the DEI programs that were at risk as a result of the anti-DEI push. The order comes after the Trump administration and the plaintiffs in the lawsuit reached a short-term agreement to delay the policy from taking force. That agreement was slated to expire Thursday, prompting the court to rule on the matter.
CBS News
24-04-2025
- Politics
- CBS News
Judge restricts Trump administration from cutting school funding over DEI
A New Hampshire federal judge on Thursday restricted the Trump administration's ability to cut or withhold federal funding from public schools that participate in some diversity and equity initiatives. U.S. District Judge Landya McCafferty, appointed by former President Barack Obama, found that actions by the Trump administration and Education Secretary Linda McMahon to withhold funds would "cripple the operations of many educational institutions," and are a violation of executive branch power in overseeing local school districts. The ruling is not nationwide, and is limited to any public schools that work with the plaintiffs in the case, the National Education Association and the Center for Black Educator Development. The NEA is America's largest teachers union, with more than 3 million members. The suit was filed after the Trump administration demanded that all 50 states agree that their public schools would not participate in programs that violate the Trump administration's definition of violating the 1964 Civil Rights Act. In a February letter to states, the Education Department asserted that U.S. public schools have embraced "pervasive and repugnant race-based preferences," that "emanated throughout every facet of academia," including schools engaging with the "false premise that the United State is built upon 'systemic and structural racism.'" The letter instructed schools to ensure that their policies "comply with existing civil rights laws," or risk potentially losing billions in Title I money that helps low-income students across the country. If the Trump administration succeeded with its attempts to keep diversity efforts out of schools, McCafferty wrote that public schools would likely eliminate teaching roles that involve race or censor teachers who teach about race. "Would the Department conclude that a history teacher leading a class discussion on the economic development of the antebellum south has violated Title VI? What about an English teacher assigning students to write a paper comparing the persecution of Tom Robinson—whom Atticus Finch championed in To Kill a Mockingbird—to that of Emmett Till? And how would such lessons even relate to a "diversity, equity, and inclusion" program?" McCafferty wrote in her opinion. "These are not hypotheticals. School teachers throughout the country are asking themselves these and similar questions in the wake of the 2025 Letter." McCafferty also found that the Trump administration's definition of diversity, equity and inclusion as unlawful is "in stark contrast to the dictionary definition of DEI" and "inconsistent with the ordinary meaning of the phrase." National Education Association President Becky Pringle said in a statement to reporters that "today's ruling allows educators and schools to continue to be guided by what's best for students, not by the threat of illegal restrictions and punishment." White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said President Trump is "protecting the civil rights of all Americans by ending radical DEI programs that violate Supreme Court precedent in order to safeguard the Constitution's promise of equality before the law. Any judge objecting to this effort is making a mockery of the Constitution they swore an oath to uphold." The crackdown on diversity and equity programs in schools is part of a broader rebuke of DEI initiatives by the Trump administration. Shortly after taking office, Mr. Trump signed executive orders directing an end to diversity, equity and inclusion programs in the federal government, and required federal contractors to certify that they do not support DEI initiatives.
New York Times
24-04-2025
- Politics
- New York Times
Judge Limits Trump's Ability to Withhold School Funds Over D.E.I.
A federal judge in New Hampshire limited on Thursday the Trump administration's ability to withhold federal funds from public schools that have certain diversity and equity initiatives. The judge, Landya B. McCafferty, said that the administration had not provided an adequately detailed definition of 'diversity, equity and inclusion,' and that its policy threatened to restrict free speech in the classroom while overstepping the executive branch's legal authority over local schools. She also wrote that the loss of federal funding 'would cripple the operations of many educational institutions.' However, she declined to issue a nationwide pause on the policy. Instead, she limited her ruling to schools that employ or contract with at least one member of the groups that brought the lawsuit: the National Education Association, the nation's largest teachers' union, and the Center for Black Educator Development, a nonprofit that seeks to recruit and train Black teachers. The N.E.A. has about three million members, including some in states that bar teachers from collective bargaining. It is possible that most school districts in the nation would be affected by the ruling. Judge McCafferty was appointed by former President Barack Obama. The Trump administration is expected to appeal her ruling. The administration had employed a novel legal strategy, arguing that the Supreme Court's 2023 decision banning affirmative action in college admissions also applied to K-12 education. The government has said that the ruling means public schools should end programs meant to serve specific racial groups. The Trump administration has not offered a detailed definition of what it calls 'illegal D.E.I. practices.' But it has suggested that efforts to provide targeted academic support or counseling to specific groups of students, such as Black boys, amount to illegal segregation. The administration has also argued that lessons on concepts such as white privilege or structural racism, which posits that racism is embedded in social institutions, are discriminatory toward white children. Earlier this month, the administration demanded that all 50 state education agencies attest that their schools do not use D.E.I. practices that violate President Trump's interpretation of civil rights law, or risk losing billions in Title I money, which is targeted toward low-income students. About a dozen states, mostly Democratic leaning, refused to sign the document. Several Republican-leaning states have signed the letter, but many already had regulations in place restricting how race and gender could be discussed in schools. North Carolina signed the letter, but in doing so said it disagreed with the Trump administration's interpretation of civil rights law and argued that the attempted ban on D.E.I. had overstepped the department's authority. 'We will continue working to ensure fairness, remove barriers to opportunity, and make decisions based on merit and need,' wrote Maurice 'Mo' Green, the Democratic state superintendent, in a letter to Linda McMahon, the education secretary. In a hearing last week, Judge McCafferty noted that the administration had sought to ban lessons that caused white students to feel 'shame.' She asked an administration lawyer whether students could still engage with history lessons that traced the concept of structural racism through events like slavery, Jim Crow and the Tulsa race massacre of 1921, in which a thriving Black neighborhood was destroyed by a white mob. Would teaching such a class be illegal, she asked, if it caused a student to feel ashamed of that history? A lawyer for the Justice Department, Abhishek Kambli, responded, 'It goes toward how they treat the current students, not what they teach.' These questions may reach the Supreme Court. Last year, the justices declined to hear a case on diversity efforts in the admissions system of a selective public high school in Virginia. That choice seemed to suggest that the court's decision on affirmative action in college admissions did not immediately apply to K-12 education. But Edward Blum, president of Students for Fair Admissions, the conservative legal group that brought the case challenging affirmative action, said he continued to believe the Supreme Court decision had set a precedent for the entire education system, including K-12 public schools. His group has filed an amicus brief in the suit brought by the N.E.A. and A.C.L.U., backing the Trump administration's reading of civil rights law. 'As some of the justices have signaled, it is my belief that the court is waiting for a case with the right procedural posture and factual record to address K-12 racial policies and programs,' Mr. Blum said.
