On February 14, 2025, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) Acting Assistant Secretary Craig Trainor sent a Dear Colleague Letter (DCL) to colleges, universities, and Pre-K-12 schools informing them that they had two weeks to comply with a new U.S. Department of Education (USDE) requirement to eliminate race-based practices for admissions, hiring, and other programming. Schools that fail to comply with the DCL are at risk of losing federal funding.

The four-page letter stated that in recent years schools have “discriminated against students on the basis of race, including white and Asian students, many of whom come from disadvantaged backgrounds and low-income families.” It went on to say, “These institutions’ embrace of pervasive and repugnant race-based preferences and other forms of racial discrimination have emanated throughout every facet of academia.”

The letter follows up an Executive Order to eliminate all diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) practices in schools and at the USDE itself, and cites legal requirements under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Protection Clause

Exactly how pre-K-12 schools should comply to the DCL is causing confusion, since it seems unclear as to what the directive actually means. One viewpoint is that in a broad sense schools are not allowed to have race-aligned student affinity groups or celebrations of different races and ethnicities. Another viewpoint is that the directive is limited to race-based practices in school admissions, as they apply to school choice programs, and in workforce hiring and promotions. As has often been the case, it is likely that the former (broader) viewpoint is the actual intent and that it may be narrowed down as enforcement occurs and challenges arise.

It is also possible that, according to the DCL, there will be additional legal guidance from OCR. Although that still leaves schools in a “gray” area and a potentially tenuous situation, the letter states that in the meantime schools should be aware that “relying on non-racial information as a proxy for race, and making decisions based on that information, violates the law.”

As a follow-up, on February 18, 2025 in a USDE statement Trainor said, “For decades, schools have been operating on the pretext that selecting students for ‘diversity’ or similar euphemisms is not selecting them based on race. No longer.” “Students should be assessed according to merit, accomplishment, and character — not prejudged by the color of their skin.” In addition, he said that schools have been notified that they can’t use race preferences or stereotypes “as a factor in their admissions, hiring, promotion, compensation, scholarships, prizes, administrative support, sanctions, discipline, and beyond.”

Noting that in his estimation the directive is not complicated, Trainor advised that, if unsure, schools should use a “test” provided in the DCL which states, “If an educational institution treats a person of one race differently than it treats another person because of that person’s race, the educational institution violates the law.”

Lastly, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a temporary office charged by President Donald Trump to eliminate federal waste, said on social media that the letter means states have ”14 days to remove all DEI programming in all public schools.” Noncompliance could result in a loss of federal funding.

NOTE: The OCR letter specifically refers to the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard That struck down race-conscious college admissions practices. At the K-12 level, the Supreme Court has declined to hear oral arguments in two race-based admissions challenges: Boston Parent Coalition For Academic Excellence Corp. v. The School Committee for the City of Boston and TJ v. Fairfax County School Board.

To access the DCL click here.

Source: K-12 Dive.

A high-stakes lawsuit, Texas v. Becerra, is currently making its way through the courts, threatening crucial protections for people with disabilities under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. This federal lawsuit brought by Republican state attorneys general against the Biden Administration’s updated disability discrimination regulation, challenges two aspects of that rule-. One aspect potentially allows discrimination protections for transgender individuals while the other sets parameters for application of the statutory “integration mandate.”

In its suit, Texas and its 16 supporting states (i.e., Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, Flordia, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, and West Virginia) claim that these two aspects of the rule violate the Administrative Procedures Act and that they, and the entirety of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act violated the Constitution’s Spending Clause. Thus, in claiming that Section 504 is unconstitutional and instead of taking aim at those specific provisions, the lawsuit seeks to dismantle Section 504 in its entirety. If successful, this case could strip away fundamental protections, making it easier for discrimination against disabled individuals to go unchallenged.

The case is currently being considered by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, and whatever their ruling is likely to be appealed up to the 5^th Circuit Court of Appeals, before possibly going to the U.S. Supreme Court.

To view a video detailing the case by the Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund (DREDF), click here.

For more information from The Educators Room, click here.

On February 10, 2025, the U.S. Department of Education (USDE) has approximately $881 million in multiyear research contracts, which are expected to affect data accuracy and the implementation of evidence-based practices. The contracts terminated by the Education Department’s Institute of Educational Sciences include 29 related to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI),  totaling $101 million. 

The USDE reports that it “removed or archived” hundreds of DEI-related outward-facing documents (i.e., guidance, reports, and training materials) to comply with a presidential executive order to end federal DEI activities. The USDE has also put employees charged with leading DEI efforts on paid leave.

The announce cuts are expected to prevent the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) from reporting data on school, college and university finances and to facilitate a loss of future survey data to understand the extent of teacher shortages and chronic absenteeism in schools.

For more from K-12 Dive, click here.