A mural of the artist Tene Smith is seen near the entrance of Chicago Women in Comercio, a non -profit organization dedicated to training and retaining women in the qualified construction trades is photographed on April 1, 2025 at the Chicago facilities.
Claire Savage/AP
Hiding place
alternate
Claire Savage/AP
Washington – A federal judge on Thursday scored two Trump administration actions aimed at eliminating programs of diversity, equity and inclusion in the schools and universities of the Nation.
In her ruling, the American district judge Stephanie Gallagher in Maryland discovered that the Department of Education violated the law when she threatened to reduce the federal funds of the educational institutions that continued with the initiatives ofi.
The guide has been waiting since April when three federal judges blocked several parts of the anti-Dei measures of the education departments.
Thursday’s ruling followed a motion of summary judgment of the American Federation of Teachers and the American Sociological Association, which challenged the government’s actions in a February demand.
The cases focus on two memoranda of the Department of Education that order schools and universities that put an end to all “decision -based decision” or face sanctions to a total loss of federal funds. It is part of a campaign to end the practices of the Trump administration frames as discrimination against white and Asian -American students.
The new ruling orders the department to eliminate the guide because it is carried out in conflict or procedure requirements, although Gallagher wrote that he has no opinion about whether the policies were “good or bad, prudent or dumb, fair or unfair.”
Gallagher, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, rejected the government’s argument that the memoranda simply served to remind schools that discrimination is illegal.
“It began a maritime change in how the Department of Education regulates educational practices and behavior in the classroom, which makes millions of educators reasonably fear that their legal and even beneficial discourse can cause articles.
Democracy Forward, a legal defense firm that represents the plaintiffs, described it as an important victory over the administration attack against Dei.
“Threatening teachers and sowing chaos in schools through America is part of the war against administration, and today people,” said Skye Perryman, president and CEO of the group.
A statement from the Department of Education on Thorsday said that it was disappointed with the ruling, but that “the judicial action that indicates or cancels this guide has not stopped our ability to enforce title VI protections at an unprecedented level.”
The conflict began with a memorandum of February 14 that declares that any consideration of breed in admissions, financial aid, hiring or other aspects of academic and student life would be considered a violation of the Federal Civil Rights Law.
The memorandum drastically expanded the interpretation of the government of a decision of the Supreme Court of 2023 that prohibits universities from considering the breed in admission decisions. The Government argued that the ruling applied not only to admissions but to all education, prohibiting “breed -based preferences” or any kind.
“Educational institutes have toxic indoctrinated students with the false premise that the United States is based on ‘systemic and structural racism and advanced discriminatory policies and practices,” says Craig Trainor, Assistans.
Another memorandum in April asked the state education agencies to certify that they did not use “illegal practices of Dei”. The offenders risked to lose federal money and be prosecuted under the law of false claims, he said.
In total, the guide amounted to a large -scale rethinking of the government’s approach towards civil rights in education. He pointed to the policies that were created to address pulmonary racial disparities, saying that these practices were their own form of discrimination.
The memoranda attracted a wave of reaction of the states and educational groups that called him censorship of the illegal government.
In its demand, the American Federation of Masters said that the Government, imposing limits “unclear and highly subjective” in schools throughout the country. He said that teachers and teachers had to “choose between cooling their constitutionally protected speech and association or risking federal funds and being subject to prosecution.”