A federal judge in Maryland has overturned two actions from the Trump administration that sought to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs in educational institutions. U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher ruled that the U.S. Department of Education acted unlawfully when it threatened to withdraw federal funding from schools and universities that maintained DEI initiatives. The ruling, issued on Thursday, is a significant affirmation of the rights of educational institutions to implement such programs without fear of government reprisal.
The judge’s decision follows a motion for summary judgment filed by the American Federation of Teachers and the American Sociological Association, who challenged the government’s actions in a lawsuit initiated earlier this year. Gallagher’s ruling comes after the guidance had been placed on hold since April when three federal judges temporarily blocked various aspects of the Education Department’s anti-DEI measures.
Key Findings of the Ruling
The case revolves around two memos from the Education Department, which mandated that schools cease all “race-based decision-making” or face penalties that could include a total loss of federal funding. This directive was hailed by the Trump administration as a necessary measure to combat what it described as discrimination against white and Asian American students.
In her ruling, Gallagher stated that the Department of Education’s actions did not comply with procedural requirements, emphasizing that she did not express an opinion on the merit of the policies themselves. She noted, “It initiated a sea change in how the Department of Education regulates educational practices and classroom conduct, causing millions of educators to reasonably fear that their lawful, and even beneficial, speech might cause them or their schools to be punished.”
The Education Department did not respond to requests for comment following the ruling.
Background of the Conflict
The controversy began with a memo issued on February 14, 2023, which declared that any consideration of race in admissions, financial aid, hiring, or other elements of academic life would be deemed a violation of federal civil rights law. This memo significantly broadened the government’s interpretation of a Supreme Court decision from earlier that year, which prohibited colleges from factoring race into admissions processes.
The government argued that the Supreme Court ruling applied universally across all educational practices, banning “race-based preferences” in any form. Craig Trainor, the acting assistant secretary of the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights, stated, “Educational institutions have toxically indoctrinated students with the false premise that the United States is built upon ‘systemic and structural racism’ and advanced discriminatory policies and practices.”
Additionally, a memo released in April instructed state education agencies to confirm that they were not employing “illegal DEI practices,” warning that violations could lead to the loss of federal funding and potential legal consequences under the False Claims Act.
The guidance was met with widespread backlash from various states and educational organizations, which criticized it as an infringement on free speech and a form of government censorship. In its lawsuit, the American Federation of Teachers argued that the government was imposing vague and subjective limits on educational practices, forcing educators to choose between exercising their constitutionally protected rights and retaining federal support.
Democracy Forward, the legal advocacy group representing the plaintiffs, characterized the ruling as a victory against the administration’s aggressive approach to education. Skye Perryman, the group’s president and CEO, commented, “Threatening teachers and sowing chaos in schools throughout America is part of the administration’s war on education, and today the people won.”
As educational institutions navigate the implications of this ruling, the ongoing debate surrounding DEI programs and their role in American education continues to evolve. The decision reflects not only legal considerations but also the broader societal discourse on race, equity, and inclusion in educational settings.
