The Teachers union has taken legal action against the US Department of Education regarding an administrative policy that seeks to limit diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices in schools nationwide.
A lawsuit has been initiated against the US Department of Education regarding their new civil rights guidance, which requires the removal of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices in institutions nationwide. Its applicability extends well beyond college admissions; it encompasses hiring, training, and student service activities across all levels of education.
As a legal precedent for this far-reaching application, the memo references the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard.
LEGAL OBJECTIVE
The legal action represents an initiative by the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), along with its Maryland affiliate and the American Sociological Association. According to the lawsuit, the guidance from the Department of Education issued on February 14 in a ‘Dear Colleague’ letter, which requires schools to end practices related to DEI by the end of February 2025, is regarded as overly vague.
The plaintiff contends that the guidance misinterprets existing laws and lacks a valid legal basis for its stance on race-related practices. The lawsuit states that “This letter radically upends and rewrites otherwise well-established jurisprudence.”
EFFECT ON CIVIL RIGHTS AND FREE SPEECH
The legal action also underscores the way in which the directive violates First Amendment rights regarding free speech and free association. AFT President Randi Weingarten stated, “This memo, which is both vague and evidently unconstitutional, constitutes a serious assault on students, our profession, and the very concept of knowledge.”
The lawsuit claims that the guidance infringes on the civil rights of students and educators by limiting open discussions about race-related topics. The groups involved in the lawsuit allege that the Department violated procedural requirements set forth by the Administrative Procedures Act by circumventing a transparent rulemaking process. The plaintiffs claim that the absence of due process further undermines the validity of the directive.
This case underscores the tension between federal regulation and institutional autonomy in efforts to promote diversity and address racial disparities in schools.
Leave feedback about this