What’s New
The Office of Civil Rights’ Dear Colleague letter that calls for an end to all race-conscious programs and “discriminatory” history lessons is an overreach of the Education Department’s authority to determine what can be taught in classrooms and misinterprets the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision on race-conscious admissions, a lawsuit filed Tuesday argues.
The lawsuit, filed by the American Federation of Teachers and the American Sociological Association, is the first legal challenge to OCR’s guidance, which gave colleges and schools just two weeks to eliminate or alter programs, some of which have for decades provided academic support for marginalized students. Colleges that don’t comply with OCR’s guidance by Friday, February 28, could have their federal funding revoked, the letter said.
“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. But it is not,” lawyers wrote.
A spokesperson from the Education Department declined to comment, saying, “The U.S. Department of Education does not discuss pending litigation.”
The Details
OCR’s letter interprets the Supreme Court ruling prohibiting race-conscious admissions in higher education as applying to other areas, including administrators’ consideration of race in hiring, student housing, scholarships, financial aid, graduation ceremonies, and student life. The letter also states that teachers and professors should not acknowledge “systemic and structural racism” in their history lessons.
The lawsuit states that under the OCR’s guidance, teachers would have to reexamine the ways they teach topics like slavery, the Emancipation Proclamation, the creation of Native American reservations, and the civil rights movement.
“You cannot bury that history,” Randi Weingarten, the American Federation of Teachers president, said in an interview. “I don’t care who the administration is.”
Adia Harvey Wingfield, president of the American Sociological Association, said her organization became involved in the lawsuit because of the letter’s restrictions on classroom discussions on race, which could impact research on racial inequality and courses on historical sociology.
“I don’t know how you talk about that without also talking about the role that race played,” Wingfield said.
The plaintiffs argue that the department’s references to discrimination against white and Asian students are too vague, and fail to give clear indication of what programs are illegal. Lawyers point out that there’s no law that prevents the teaching of race and racism, and the Supreme Court did not ban programs to eliminate disparities between white students and students of color.
They argue that, if implemented, the letter would have a “devastating” impact on colleges’ ability to expand viewpoints in the classroom and offer equal access to education for all students.
“Federal statute already prohibits any president from telling schools and colleges what to teach. And students have the right to learn without the threat of culture wars waged by extremist politicians hanging over their heads,” Weingarten said in a statement.
The Backdrop
The lawsuit is the latest in a string of legal challenges that have temporarily paused federal agencies from implementing Trump’s campaign to end diversity initiatives in the public and private sector. Last week, a judge temporarily blocked two of Trump’s executive orders that sought to end diversity programs in the federal government.
The lawsuits and the temporary injunctions have offered little relief to college presidents who had begun to review or terminate their campuses’ race-conscious programs to avoid scrutiny. Since 2023, The Chronicle has tracked 250 college campuses that have made changes to DEI initiatives, including diversity offices, cultural centers, and the use of diversity statements. More than 60 percent of campus changes have come in response to state legislation.
The Stakes
The letter’s ambiguity and threats to federal funding have sent confusion through the higher-education sector over which programs could be deemed exclusionary.
Ted Mitchell, the American Council on Education president, called on the Education Department to rescind the letter in a statement Tuesday on behalf of more than 60 education associations, adding that many activities associated with DEI aren’t illegal.
“We respectfully request that the Department rescind the DCL and engage with the higher education community to ensure a clear understanding of their legal obligations in this area,” Mitchell wrote.
