Each year, state and local education officials are required to assure the U.S. Department of Education of their adherence to federal regulations, including civil rights laws, in order to secure federal funding. Recently, on April 3, the department issued a memo urging school leaders to reaffirm their commitment to these laws or face potential loss of federal funds. This request left many educators perplexed, as they believed they had already complied for the current school year.
David Law, upcoming president of The School Superintendents Association and superintendent of Minnetonka Public Schools in Minnesota, expressed his confusion, noting that this situation was unprecedented since schools already comply with non-discrimination policies.
The department’s recent directive, issued by the Trump administration, requires K-12 school leaders to re-certify their commitment to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits race-based discrimination. Failure to comply could result in forfeiture of federal funds, including those meant for programs aiding low-income students.
The order implies that diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives could violate civil rights laws, though it lacks clear guidelines on what constitutes such violations. Law highlighted the ambiguity surrounding DEI, stating that its definition varies widely among different stakeholders.
The Education Department has not responded to requests for clarification on what actions might be considered violations or how they plan to enforce this interpretation of civil rights law. However, acting assistant secretary for civil rights, Craig Trainor, noted that some schools have allegedly used DEI programs to discriminate against certain groups to benefit others based on identity traits.
State responses to the directive have been varied. For instance, Pennsylvania’s Acting Secretary of Education, Carrie Rowe, reassured local school leaders that the federal letter did not specifically identify illegal DEI practices. In contrast, Arizona’s Superintendent of Public Instruction, Tom Horne, agrees with the administration’s stance, advising schools to avoid concepts like Critical Race Theory, which he believes promote division.
Initially, schools had 10 days to comply with the re-certification, but this deadline was extended to April 24 following a lawsuit filed by educators and teacher unions. New York quickly opposed the federal directive, questioning the government’s authority to mandate re-certification as a condition for federal funding. Minnesota, Illinois, and Wisconsin are among other states that have resisted the directive.
Some states like Vermont, Missouri, and Montana issued a single blanket certification for all their school districts, while states like New Hampshire and Idaho required individual certifications from each district.
As states navigate these directives, legal experts, such as Julie Underwood from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, question the directive’s legality. Underwood states typically have the right to challenge civil rights violation accusations before being penalized.
The Education Department’s recent guidance is creating widespread concern among education leaders, with administrators expressing fear over losing focus on essential educational goals. The ongoing changes cause significant anxiety within school communities, distracting from their primary mission to ensure students feel engaged and included.
