Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, LITIGATION NEWS, TRENDS—States sue Department of Education for unconstitutionally enforcing presidential DEI directive, (Apr 28, 2025)

By Patricia K. Ruiz, J.D.

ED can only engage in enforcement and withholding of Title VI based on rules that have gone through the notice and comment process, the states argued.

Nineteen states have filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education (ED), Secretary of Education Linda McMahon, and Assistant Secretary of the Office for Civil Rights Craig Trainor, challenging the Trump administration’s implementation of a series of executive orders (the presidential directive) to eliminate a category of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) school programs it claims constitute illegal discrimination under federal law. The ED annually provides states with billions of dollars in Congressionally-mandated financial support for a wide range of programs and services; as part of the administrative process for receiving these funds, state and local education agencies (SEAs and LEAs) routinely provide written assurances that they will comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

ED actions. On April 3, 2025, ED departed from a longstanding and statutorily mandated process by directing state and local education agencies to complete a novel and unlawful certification that would impose new onerous conditions to receipt of federal funding. The conditions include indicating agreement with the ED’s new, vague, confusing, and incorrect interpretation of Title VI with respect to DEI; requiring SEAs to affirmatively investigate whether LEAs are supporting or providing for DEI in their schools; reporting on every LEA’s compliance with ED’s unsupported position that “certain” undefined diversity, equity, and inclusion programming, instruction, and curriculum is prohibited by Title VI; and developing plans to align every LEA with the ED’s new, ambiguous, and unsupported interpretation.

Arguments. The states argue that the ED’s implementation of the directive is unconstitutional and otherwise unlawful, as ED can only engage in enforcement and withholding of Title VI based on rules that have gone through the notice and comment process. Even then, the states argue, it can only withhold funds after completing an extensive iterative process, including conducting an appropriate, unbiased investigation; making a determination that an SEA or LEA is not in compliance with Title VI and its implementing regulations; offering an opportunity for an SEA or LEA to review a findings letter; engaging in a voluntary resolution process; notifying Congress; and waiting 30 days. However, the complaint states that the ED “may not weaponize an intentionally vague, unlawful interpretation of Title VI through wholesale and sudden termination of federal funds against plaintiff states that cannot lawfully or practically comply with unprecedented agency demands.”

Relief sought. The states asked the court to declare the ED’s agency April 3 action unlawful and null and void and to vacate and set aside the agency’s action. Further, the states asked the court to preliminarily and permanently enjoin the defendants from implementing the April 3 agency action or any similar unlawful agency action implementing the presidential directive against the states.

Statements. “The U.S. Department of Education is unapologetically abandoning its mission to ensure equal access to education with its latest threat to wholesale terminate congressionally mandated federal education funding,” said California Attorney General Rob Bonta. “Let me be clear: the federal Department of Education is not trying to ‘combat’ discrimination with this latest order. Instead it is using our nation’s foundational civil rights law as a pretext to coerce states into abandoning efforts to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion through lawful programs and policies. Once again, the President has exceeded his authority under the Constitution and violated the law.”

“Every student has the fundamental right to learn in an environment that is welcoming and open to everyone,” said New York Attorney General Leticia James. “The Trump administration is illegally trying to stop efforts that prevent discrimination in our schools, support students with disabilities, and provide resources for students in need while jeopardizing billions of dollars in essential federal education funding.”

The complaint lists as plaintiffs the States of New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, California, Minnesota, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawai’i, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin.

The states filed their lawsuit in the District of Massachusetts; the case is No. 1:25-cv-11116.

News: LitigationNewsTrends Discrimination PublicEmployees