The frantic speed of the Trump Administration’s education policy changes is leaving K-12 school officials confused about what orders are legal, whether they need to alter district policies to stay in compliance, and what, if any, federal funding might be at risk.
The April 3 letter that sought to disqualify any K-12 schools with diversity, equity and inclusion programs from receiving federal funding is a good example. The Department of Education missive, titled in part Reminder of Legal Obligations Undertaken in Exchange for Receiving Federal Financial Assistance, requested certification from school officials that they were meeting various federal laws in order to receive Title VI funding.
Within days, at least two school districts, City Schools of Decatur in Georgia and Haldane Central School District in Cold Spring, New York, altered policies to try to comply with current government discrimination definitions. Decatur rescinded two policies about equity and school board governance, while Haldane’s Board of Education voted unanimously to suspend its wide-ranging DEI policy, which sought “to advance inclusive and culturally responsive teaching and learning.” But when a trio of rulings from federal court judges found that the Trump administration could not withhold federal funds for these reasons, both districts rushed to reinstate their policies.
“It’s a really complicated landscape right now,” said Ray Li, policy counsel for education equity at the Legal Defense Fund. He reiterated that DEI policies, affinity groups, and racially inclusive curricula are not illegal and never have been for school districts.
Not an Either/Or
One of the confusing issues in this dispute is who’s defining DEI. Carlos Hoyt, who has worked as a diversity and equity trainer at several private schools in Massachusetts, maintains that making DEI a binary question between having a policy or not having a policy is a false choice. He said even policies that hold that some people are more deserving of resources and protections than others is a form of DEI, albeit a restrictive method. An expansive method of DEI would be more inclusive, he added.
“No one can be against DEI. It’s just a matter of one’s approach to it,” he added.
In Decatur, Board Vice Chairman Hans Utz admitted in a public meeting on April 23 that the board’s original decision to cut equity policies was “wrong.” The board had rescinded two policies and amended three others on April 4, just a day after the Department of Education request. The actions were not made public until an April 15 meeting. When one parent shouted her displeasure about eliminating the DEI policies during this meeting, three city police officers carried her out of the room.
“We were counseled to be quiet,” Utz said, according to a story in Decaturish.com. “The risk that we faced of dissolution was great enough that we needed to not draw attention to it,” he said. “We followed that [advice] and we were wrong.”
Decatur officials said the 10-school, 5,500-student district gets about $3.2 million in federal funding, mostly for special education. The school board unanimously agreed to reinstate all its DEI policies on April 29, four days after the three court rulings issued preliminary injunctions against Department of Education requests.
Both Utz and board chairman Carmen Sulton declined to comment further on the board’s actions when reached recently via email.
Nia Batra, the student representative on Decatur’s board, called the board’s original decision “hasty” but added that it was “a reflection of the panic this current administration has instilled, where many governing bodies feel compelled to comply without proper information or legal counsel,” she said. “Boards should be more willing to stand up to this administration’s bullying.”
Removal, then Reversal
While DEI’s roots extend back to the Civil Rights era, in 2020, after George Floyd’s murder, there was a “major shift” in government, companies, and schools adopting DEI policies, according to the Center for Urban and Racial Equity. In 2021, then-President Joe Biden signed an executive order calling for federal departments to advance racial equity. Just two years later, however, the Supreme Court ruled against the affirmative action programs from Harvard and the University of North Carolina. Haldane adopted its policy in 2022 while Decatur passed its equity policy in 2023.
In New York, Haldane’s school district suspended its DEI policy on April 22 and reinstated it on May 6. The 800-student, three-school district feared losing about $450,000 in federal funds.
While Haldane officials did not respond to questions about the issue, in a letter released to the public on April 26, the Board of Education said it suspended its DEI policy to investigate “minor language revisions that would not alter the spirit of the policy.” The letter added, “Given the speed with which the federal government is canceling funding for projects and activities, we were genuinely concerned that they would withhold this funding from Haldane.”
Five days later, in another letter, the board announced that it would reinstate the policy in full after the Education Department was blocked from withholding funds over this issue. Board members met with the public and high school students in separate sessions to discuss the issue and respond to comments.
New York was one of 19 states to sue the Trump Administration, claiming that DEI policies did not violate the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving federal funding.
Li with the Legal Defense Fund said departmental orders, such as the Department of Education Reminder of Legal Obligations, “don’t create law and can’t change the application of Title VI itself.”
The ‘Dear Colleague’ Letter
While the April reminder is one example of the administration causing confusion by issuing supposed new rules that have then been stopped by legal challenges, there have been other attempts. In February, the Department of Education issued a Dear Colleague letter to both higher education institutions and K-12 schools to “clarify and reaffirm the nondiscrimination obligations of schools… Discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin is illegal and morally reprehensible.”
The four-page letter from Craig Trainor, the acting assistant secretary for civil rights at the Department of Education, specifically mentioned discrimination against white and Asian students, while calling for all institutions to comply with federal civil rights law within 14 days. In April, a federal judge enjoined the DOE from “enforcing and/or implementing” this letter, as well as two other DEI-based DOE rulings.
Not everyone was confused by the flurry of action. In Massachusetts, Gov. Maura Healey and state Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell rushed to issue joint guidance to the state’s higher education institutions and K-12 schools after the February Dear Colleague letter: “Massachusetts educational institutions should continue their work to foster diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility among their student bodies.”
“We believe that bringing people of different backgrounds and perspectives to the table – including women, people of color, and the LGBTQ+ community – is a strength, especially in education,” the governor said.
On July 30, the Department of Justice joined the Education Department’s campaign by issuing guidance that recipients of federal funding can’t “engage in unlawful discrimination.” The nine-page memo specifically called out DEI programs.
But, Li added, this guidance remains an “open legal question” while courts decipher the exact meaning. “It’s messy for that reason.” Even though courts haven’t acted on the Department of Justice guidance, Li said, because it rests on the same arguments as the previously mentioned DOE actions, it is likely to be rejected by a future court decision.
Tracking Cases
Because of the fast-moving actions by the federal government and various court lawsuits and decisions, there are two ways school officials can track ongoing cases. Lawfare, a journal covering legal and policy issues, has a litigation tracker that monitors 227 active cases challenging Trump administration actions, 19 lawsuits by the administration against state or local laws, as well as other cases where the Supreme Court has ruled or judges have ruled for or against the federal government. Also, the Brookings Institution has its own litigation tracker covering all the challenges to Trump’s executive actions that impact K-12.
In the meantime, federal targeting of DEI and gender issues has had a financial impact on schools.In September, the Trump administration said it would cancel more than $65 million in funding for magnet schools in New York City, Chicago, and Fairfax, Virginia.
The administration called for both New York and Fairfax to change gender policies that allow students to participate in physical education and athletic team sports based on their gender identity. In Chicago, the administration called for the district to eliminate its Black Student Success Plan.
“The Education Department is taking a one-by-one approach,” Li said. He wasn’t surprised that officials from Haldane and Decatur refused to comment further about their cases. “I don’t think anyone wants to attract attention right now,” Li said.
Hoyt said the national debate about DEI hasn’t stopped schools he works with from continuing its training programs.
“People know they need to do the work,” he said, adding that he is scheduled to conduct DEI training at the four campuses of the Brooke Charter School in Boston and Chelsea, Massachusetts.
The former associate dean of students at Phillips Academy in Andover, Massachusetts, Hoyt has also taught at four different colleges in the Bay State, including Boston University. He works with Boston College’s Lynch Leadership Academy, a program that annually trains about 30 school officials seeking to become principals. His equity and justice training in the academy’s year-long cohort will continue, he said.
But Hoyt doesn’t expect resolution in this fight anytime soon. Citing the partisanship over the language, policies and funding of DEI today, he said, “I think we’re stuck with this [uncertainty] for a while.”
This post is exclusively published on eduexpertisehub.com
Source link
