Latest news with #SupportingEffectiveEducatorDevelopmentProgram
Yahoo
04-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Divided Supreme Court sides with Trump to block teacher grants
A divided Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration by allowing officials to block $65 million in teacher development grants frozen over concerns they were promoting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) practices. The 5-4 emergency ruling, for now, lifts a lower order that forced the Education Department to resume the grants in eight Democratic-led states that are suing. Five of the court's six conservatives sided with the administration to grant the request. Chief Justice John Roberts and the court's three liberal justices dissented. The decision is not a final ruling in the case, and the dispute could ultimately return to the Supreme Court. Friday's order enables the administration to keep the grants blocked until any appeals are resolved. 'Respondents have represented in this litigation that they have the financial wherewithal to keep their programs running. So, if respondents ultimately prevail, they can recover any wrongfully withheld funds through suit in an appropriate forum,' the majority said it its unsigned ruling. In February, the administration began canceling disbursements under two federal education grants aimed at developing educators and combatting teacher shortages: the Teacher Quality Partnership Program and the Supporting Effective Educator Development Program. Officials have cast the freezes as part of the administration's broader crackdown on DEI, and it also comes as Trump and Education Secretary Linda McMahon look to effectively gut the department. U.S. District Judge Myong Joun, an appointee of former President Obama who serves in Boston, issued a March 10 temporary restraining order mandating the administration immediately resume the grant programs in the eight states. The Trump administration's Supreme Court emergency appeal comes after a three-judge panel on the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined to lift Joun's ruling. The chief justice did not explain his dissent, but the court's three liberals chastised the majority for getting involved at the early stage of the case. 'The risk of error increases when this Court decides cases—as here—with barebones briefing, no argument, and scarce time for reflection,' Justice Elena Kagan wrote in a two-paragraph solo dissent. 'Sometimes, the Court must act in that way despite the risk. And there will of course be good-faith disagreements about when that is called for,' she continued. 'But in my view, nothing about this case demanded our immediate intervention. Rather than make new law on our emergency docket, we should have allowed the dispute to proceed in the ordinary way.' In a much lengthier dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, said it was 'beyond puzzling' that the majority viewed the dispute as an emergency. 'This Court's eagerness to insert itself into this early stage of ongoing litigation over the lawfulness of the Department's actions—even when doing so facilitates the infliction of significant harms on the Plaintiff States, and even though the Government has not bothered to press any argument that the Department's harm‐causing conduct is lawful—is equal parts unprincipled and unfortunate. It is also entirely unwarranted,' Jackson wrote. The administration has filed a series of such emergency applications urging the justices to rein in lower courts that have blocked Trump's policies. 'Beyond the systemic, irreparable constitutional harm to the Executive Branch from judicial arrogation of executive functions as to how and when agencies will disburse or cancel grants, even the court of appeals acknowledged that the government 'may incur some irreparable harm if it cannot recoup this money,'' the Justice Department wrote in court filings. The states, whose lawsuit alleges applicable regulations don't permit the administration to stop the grant programs, noted the lower ruling is temporary and normally not appealable. 'The district court acted appropriately in granting a narrow and time-limited restraining order while it proceeds to a prompt ruling on the motion for a preliminary injunction. There is no sound basis for this Court to stay or vacate that order,' the states wrote. Led by California, the coalition also comprises Massachusetts, New Jersey, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, New York and Wisconsin. Their lawsuit now returns to the trial court, where Joun is mulling whether to grant a longer injunction after holding a hearing last Friday. But the five justices in the majority cast doubt on the future of the lawsuit, saying Joun lacks jurisdiction. And it is just one of two lawsuits challenging the frozen teacher grants. A similar case filed by private education groups remains at a midlevel appeals court. The new ruling marks the Supreme Court's second emergency decision implicating the second Trump administration's sweeping efforts to cut aspects of federal spending. In March, the court in a 5-4 decision rejected the administration's request to freeze $2 billion in foreign aid payments. Updated 5:04 p.m. EDT Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
04-04-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Divided Supreme Court sides with Trump to block teacher grants
A divided Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration by allowing officials to block $65 million in teacher development grants frozen over concerns they were promoting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) practices. The 5-4 emergency ruling, for now, lifts a lower order that allowed the Education Department to resume the grants in eight Democratic-led states that are suing. Five of the court's six conservatives sided with the administration to grant the request. Chief Justice John Roberts and the court's three liberal justices dissented. The decision is not a final ruling in the case, and the dispute could ultimately return to the Supreme Court. In February, the administration began canceling disbursements under two federal education grants aimed at developing educators and combatting teacher shortages: the Teacher Quality Partnership Program and the Supporting Effective Educator Development Program. Officials have cast the freezes as part of the administration's broader crackdown on DEI, and it also comes as Trump and Education Secretary Linda McMahon look to effectively gut the department. U.S. District Judge Myong Joun, an appointee of former President Obama who serves in Boston, issued a March 10 temporary restraining order mandating the administration immediately resume the grant programs in the eight states. The Trump administration's Supreme Court emergency appeal comes after a three-judge panel on the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined to lift Joun's ruling. The administration has filed a series of such applications urging the justices to rein in lower courts that have blocked Trump's policies. 'Beyond the systemic, irreparable constitutional harm to the Executive Branch from judicial arrogation of executive functions as to how and when agencies will disburse or cancel grants, even the court of appeals acknowledged that the government 'may incur some irreparable harm if it cannot recoup this money,'' the Justice Department wrote in court filings. The states, whose lawsuit alleges applicable regulations don't permit the administration to stop the grant programs, noted the lower ruling is temporary and normally not appealable. 'The district court acted appropriately in granting a narrow and time-limited restraining order while it proceeds to a prompt ruling on the motion for a preliminary injunction. There is no sound basis for this Court to stay or vacate that order,' the states wrote. Led by California, the coalition also comprises Massachusetts, New Jersey, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, New York and Wisconsin. Their lawsuit now returns to the trial court, where Joun is mulling whether to grant a longer injunction after holding a Friday hearing. And it is just one of two lawsuits challenging the frozen teacher grants. A similar case filed by private education groups remains at a mid-level appeals court. The new ruling marks the Supreme Court's second emergency decision implicating the second Trump administration's sweeping efforts to cut aspects of federal spending. In March, the court in a 5-4 decision rejected the administration's request to freeze $2 billion in foreign aid payments.
Yahoo
26-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump administration goes to Supreme Court to block teacher preparation grants
The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court Wednesday to allow it to block federal teacher preparation grants that lower courts have ordered resumed. It is the latest instance of the administration urging the justices to rein in federal district judges that have blocked aspects of President Trump's sweeping agenda. 'This Court should put a swift end to federal district courts' unconstitutional reign as self-appointed managers of Executive Branch funding and grant-disbursement decisions,' acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris wrote in the application. The emergency appeal comes after lower courts agreed to a request from eight Democratic state attorneys general to resume grant disbursements under the Teacher Quality Partnership Program and the Supporting Effective Educator Development Program in their states. Both programs support teacher development. The Trump administration sought to cut off the funds last month amid a broader effort to shutter the Education Department, but the states contend that applicable regulations don't allow the Trump administration to stop the funding. The Justice Department has warned that, if the lower rulings stand, it will force the federal government to immediately pay out $65 million to the eight states that can't be recovered if their legal challenge ultimately fails. 'The aim is clear: to stop the Executive Branch in its tracks and prevent the Administration from changing direction on hundreds of billions of dollars of government largesse that the Executive Branch considers contrary to the United States' interests and fiscal health,' the application reads. By default, the request goes to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, former President Biden's sole appointee to the court who handles emergency appeals arising from the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Jackson set a Friday afternoon deadline for the Democratic-led states to respond to the Trump administration's request. She could then rule on the application alone or refer it to the full court for a vote. It is one of two challenges to the Trump administration's freeze of teacher preparation grants. A separate lawsuit filed by private education groups, which also seeks to resume a third grant program, remains in the lower courts. The case also marks the third pending emergency appeal at the Supreme Court brought by the Trump administration. The administration has also asked the justices to narrow a series of nationwide blocks on Trump's order restricting birthright citizenship and to lift another judge's order to reinstate more than 16,000 federal probationary employees. The court has already declined two previous emergency applications from the administration. In a 5-4 decision, the justices refused to allow the administration to freeze nearly $2 billion in foreign aid payments earlier this month, and earlier, they punted a demand to greenlight Trump's firing of an independent agency leader until the case became moot. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
26-03-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Trump administration goes to Supreme Court to block teacher preparation grants
The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court Wednesday to allow it to block federal teacher preparation grants that lower courts have ordered resumed. It is the latest instance of the administration urging the justices to rein in federal district judges that have blocked aspects of President Trump's sweeping agenda. 'This Court should put a swift end to federal district courts' unconstitutional reign as self-appointed managers of Executive Branch funding and grant-disbursement decisions,' acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris wrote in the application. The emergency appeal comes after lower courts agreed to a request from eight Democratic state attorneys general to resume grant disbursements under the Teacher Quality Partnership Program and the Supporting Effective Educator Development Program in their states. Both programs support teacher development. The Trump administration sought to cut off the funds last month amid a broader effort to shutter the Education Department, but the states contend that applicable regulations don't allow the Trump administration to stop the funding. The Justice Department has warned that, if the lower rulings stand, it will force the federal government to immediately pay out $65 million to the eight states that can't be recovered if their legal challenge ultimately fails. 'The aim is clear: to stop the Executive Branch in its tracks and prevent the Administration from changing direction on hundreds of billions of dollars of government largesse that the Executive Branch considers contrary to the United States' interests and fiscal health,' the application reads. By default, the request goes to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, former President Biden's sole appointee to the court who handles emergency appeals arising from the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Jackson set a Friday afternoon deadline for the Democratic-led states to respond to the Trump administration's request. She could then rule on the application alone or refer it to the full court for a vote. It is one of two challenges to the Trump administration's freeze of teacher preparation grants. A separate lawsuit filed by private education groups, which also seeks to resume a third grant program, remains in the lower courts. The case also marks the third pending emergency appeal at the Supreme Court brought by the Trump administration. The administration has also asked the justices to narrow a series of nationwide blocks on Trump's order restricting birthright citizenship and to lift another judge's order to reinstate more than 16,000 federal probationary employees. The court has already declined two previous emergency applications from the administration. In a 5-4 decision, the justices refused to allow the administration to freeze nearly $2 billion in foreign aid payments earlier this month, and earlier, they punted a demand to greenlight Trump's firing of an independent agency leader until the case became moot.
Yahoo
21-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Appeals court rules Trump must reinstate teacher preparation grants in eight states
A federal appeals court Friday refused the Trump administration's request to lift a judge's order that officials reinstate teacher preparation grants in eight Democratic-led states that sued. The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined to put the ruling on hold after the administration warned it will allow the states to immediately draw down $65 million the government can't recover if the legal challenge ultimately fails. 'The States convincingly explain that this is simply not the case, in part because recipients submit reimbursement requests for expenses already incurred. And, in fact, the Department has not pointed to any evidence of any attempt at any such a withdrawal by any recipient,' wrote U.S. Circuit Judge William Kayatta. The Justice Department previously signaled it was prepared to take the case to the high court. President Trump has publicly called for the elimination of the Education Department and signed an executive order Thursday aimed at gutting it. The lawsuit concerns two of the department's grant programs the Trump administration terminated in February: the Teacher Quality Partnership Program and the Supporting Effective Educator Development Program. Both support teacher development. Coalitions comprising three private education groups and eight Democratic state attorneys general separately sued over the terminations, claiming they violated the Administrative Procedure Act. The Trump administration appealed to the 1st Circuit after U.S. District Judge Myong Joun, an appointee of former President Biden who serves in Boston and oversees the states' challenge, ordered the administration to reinstate grant funding in the eight states until the next stage of the case. The 1st Circuit panel comprised Kayatta, an appointee of former President Obama; U.S. Circuit Judge Gustavo Gelpí, a Biden appointee; and U.S. Circuit Judge Lara Montecalvo, another Biden appointee. The states had urged the panel to not intervene, noting that such temporary orders are not normally appealable and that Joun has scheduled another hearing for March 28 on whether to grant a longer injunction. The appeals panel said it agreed to 'sidestep' that argument at this stage of the case. The Justice Department this week suggested they were prepared to seek an emergency intervention from the Supreme Court if the 1st Circuit didn't intervene, warning that the judge's ruling was 'riddled with factual and legal errors.' 'The district court dismissed the government's interest on the theory that Congress had appropriated funds for these purposes—but Congress did not specify these specific grants in its appropriation. That is a core matter of executive discretion, and a single district judge has now usurped the power to set education policy priorities,' the Justice Department wrote in court filings. In the other lawsuit, a judge has separately ordered grant funds owed to the education groups and their members be reinstated. That order also states the administration cannot terminate any more of the grant awards 'in a manner this court has determined is likely unlawful.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
