Teachers Union Files Lawsuit over Trump’s Crackdown on Race, DEI in Schools

The Washington Post

13:01 JST, February 26, 2025

A lawsuit filed Tuesday accuses the Trump administration of trying to radically rewrite well-established civil rights law when it issued a sweeping directive barring colleges and K-12 schools from considering race in virtually any way.

The guidance from the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights was sent as a “Dear Colleague” letter to school officials throughout the country Feb. 14. It threatened to deny federal funding to any school or college that considers race in hiring, discipline policy, scholarships, prizes or any other aspect of campus life. It gave schools a two-week deadline to comply, setting off confusion and panic on campuses nationwide.

The suit asks a federal district court in Maryland to ban the department from acting on these threats, saying the letter is an unconstitutional infringement on free speech and a twisting of long-standing antidiscrimination law. It was filed by the American Federation of Teachers, its Maryland affiliate and the American Sociological Association, working with Democracy Forward, which has filed several suits challenging Trump administration actions.

“This Letter is an unlawful attempt by the Department to impose this administration’s particular views of how schools should operate as if it were the law,” the suit says.

An Education Department spokeswoman declined comment on pending litigation.

The letter and the lawsuit represent polar opposite interpretations of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which bars discrimination on the basis of race in federally funded programs.

Civil rights advocates and the plaintiffs behind the lawsuit argue this law is meant to level the playing field, counter discrimination and boost opportunity for people who have historically experienced discrimination. Work to promote diversity, equity and inclusion furthers the law’s intent, they say.

But under the Trump interpretation, these same efforts are seen as unlawful discrimination in and of themselves because they take race into consideration. It relies in part on the 2023 Supreme Court decision outlawing consideration of race in college admissions, and argues that the ruling applies in areas well beyond admissions.

“The Department will no longer tolerate the overt and covert racial discrimination that has become widespread in this Nation’s educational institutions,” the letter says.

The suit counters that the letter’s interpretation of the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling goes “well beyond” the ruling itself – for instance, by asserting that race-neutral policies aimed at increasing diversity are also illegal.

And, referring to the Civil Rights Act, the lawsuit alleges that the letter “contravenes the law it purports to interpret.”

The letter is not, in and of itself, an enforcement action. Rather, it is a notice to schools throughout the country explaining how the Office for Civil Rights will interpret the law as it processes complaints.

It’s not clear what, if anything, will occur when the deadline arrives at the end of this week. Typically, the civil rights office relies on guidelines laid out in documents like the Dear Colleague letter during its investigations. It tries to force schools to comply with the laws by threatening to withhold federal funds.

In this case, the teachers union and the sociology association are suing the department to stop it from relying on the guidance document in advance, before it initiates or responds to complaints about how schools are using race in programming or teaching.

Under federal law, schools that discriminate on the basis of race are not eligible for federal funding. The federal government provides about 10 percent of K-12 funding, billions of dollars in Pell Grants and even more in student loans. It also spends billions on biomedical research and school meals, which are administered by other agencies.

The suit lays out a number of legal claims, including that the Dear Colleague letter infringes on teachers’ free speech rights and that the guidance is so sweeping that it amounts to a regulatory action that should be subject to rules requiring public comment. The suit also argues that the letter is unconstitutionally vague. It never defines, for instance, what it means by prohibited diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, practices.

It’s therefore unclear, the suit says, whether a range of common activities now risks a loss of federal funding, such as a university department of African American or Jewish studies, a Lunar New Year celebration, a conversation between a high school counselor and student about race or racism, or a tutoring program that serves mostly students of color.

The suit singles out the letter’s suggestion that teaching that the United States was built upon “systemic and structural racism” would be unlawful. It questions how a U.S. history teacher could teach a complete history without including topics such as slavery, Jim Crow segregation laws, forced relocation of Native American tribes and the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. The letter does not mention any of these events.

“No federal law prevents teaching about race and race-related topics,” the suit says. In fact, it notes, federal law prohibits the Education Department from dictating curriculum. “That racial discrimination was written into the laws of the United States is a historical fact that cannot be erased by a Dear Colleague Letter.”

It also questions how affinity groups and events will be seen by the department. The letter describes racially segregated graduation ceremonies and racial affinity housing as “a shameful echo of a darker period in this country’s history.”

Groups or events that restrict participation based on race have long been illegal. But most such school groups and activities – which are created to offer students in minority groups support and community – are actually open to all. The lawsuit interprets the letter as banning affinity groups even if they have open memberships. If true, that could bar a wide range of organizations and activities, including historically Black fraternities and sororities, Chinese-American clubs and a Jewish cultural house, the lawsuit says.

Opponents have had some success in blocking Trump administration directives. Last week, for instance, a Maryland federal district court judge blocked portions of Trump’s executive orders related to DEI from taking effect.

That ruling affected cancellation of federal contracts and requirements put on universities and publicly traded companies, but it was unclear whether it would affect the letter that the Office for Civil Rights sent to schools.