Federal Judge Rules Anti-DEI Directive for Schools Is Illegal

A federal judge in Maryland on Aug. 14 struck down a U.S. Department of Education directive aimed at removing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs at schools and universities.

The directive was contained in a Feb. 14 “Dear Colleague” letter that the federal department sent to the education departments in all 50 states. Failing to comply with the directive could lead schools to lose federal funding, the letter said.

The letter, signed by Craig Trainor, acting assistant secretary for civil rights at the U.S. Department of Education, criticized what it called “overt and covert racial discrimination” in K–12 schools and universities, particularly under the banner of DEI policies over the preceding four years.

The letter referenced practices such as discriminating against white and Asian students, promoting the “false premise that the United States is built upon ‘systemic and structural racism,’” and encouraging segregation by race at graduation ceremonies and in student housing.

Such practices, the letter stated, will no longer be tolerated because they are forbidden by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution, and the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College.

It is illegal to treat students “differently on the basis of race to achieve nebulous goals such as diversity, racial balancing, social justice, or equity,” according to the letter.

The directive came after President Donald Trump on Jan. 29 signed Executive Order 14190, which ordered federal agencies to zero out funding for “illegal and discriminatory treatment and indoctrination in K–12 schools, including based on gender ideology and discriminatory equity ideology.”

On Aug. 14, U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher held in the case, known as American Federation of Teachers v. Department of Education, that the agency’s directive violated the federal Administrative Procedure Act.

The act is a federal statute enacted in 1946 that governs administrative law procedures for federal executive departments and independent agencies. The late U.S. Sen. Pat McCarran (D-Nev.) said the law was “a bill of rights for the hundreds of thousands of Americans whose affairs are controlled or regulated in one way or another by agencies of the federal government.”

The act requires that federal agencies publish proposed rules in the Federal Register and allow the public to comment before finalizing them.

Gallagher wrote in her ruling that the department failed to follow the “stringent” procedures required by the Administrative Procedure Act, which exist “to ensure that agencies stay within the bounds of their delegated authority and exercise that authority within the constraints of the law more broadly.”

She said the court “takes no view” on whether the policies involved in the case are “good or bad, prudent or foolish, fair or unfair.”

“By leapfrogging important procedural requirements, the government has unwittingly run headfirst into serious constitutional problems.”

Gallagher rejected the government’s argument that the letter merely gave “notice of the Department’s existing interpretation of federal law,” by reminding state departments that discrimination is illegal.

The letter “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,” she said.

The directive was challenged in court by a coalition of nationwide associations of teachers and a public school district.

Randi Weingarten, who is president of the American Federation of Teachers, one of the groups that filed the legal challenge, hailed the new court ruling, which she said “confirmed the importance of our job as educators to foster opportunity, dignity, and engagement.”

“The court agreed that this vague and clearly unconstitutional requirement is a grave attack on students, our profession, honest history, and knowledge itself,” she said in a statement.

“It would hamper efforts to extend access to education, and dash the promise of equal opportunity for all, a central tenet of the United States since its founding,” Weingarten added.

Department of Justice spokesperson Natalie Baldassare told The Epoch Times the department had no comment on the case.

Bill Pan contributed to this report.