Teachers' Unions Using Lawfare to Defend Racism in Schools

Democrats are using lawfare as roadblocks to slow down the Education Department from executing its legal obligations to prohibit discrimination. The mainstream media is reporting that judges told the Education Department they "can't use federal funds to end DEI initiatives"—which is a fabrication. The conflicting rulings were related to process issues of implementation, not substance. Title VI non-discrimination law must still be enforced.

Two of the nation's largest teachers' unions as well as the NAACP are disgruntled with the Trump administration's enforcement of non-discrimination laws and filed injunctions. Three conflicting district court opinions around procedural issues may require the Supreme Court to get involved.

Media headlines lead the public to believe judges ruled against the U.S. Department of Education, but they hide the fact that judges rejected a vast majority of the complaints. Two injunctions and one stay were about procedural issues that can be resolved.

On February 14, 2025, Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights at the Education Department sent a "Dear Colleague" letter to K-12 and postsecondary public institutions who receive federal funding. The letter specified the intent of the USDOE to enforce anti-discrimination laws "under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution, and other relevant authorities." On March 1, the Department also released FAQs to answer questions related to the Dear Colleague letter. Finally, to show they were serious about enforcing the law, a certification request was sent to all education agencies who receive federal funds to provide assurances that schools aren't discriminating.

Section 601 of Title VI states that "no person . . . shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance."

In other words, when an entity receives federal funding, it comes with strings attached: Adhere to non-discrimination laws or funding will be revoked.

It's disturbing that more than 60 years since the Civil Rights Act was passed, Democrats are still opposing it like they did in the 1960s. 

(RELATED: The Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights Needs to Go)

Are the Rulings Valid?

Three different requests for injunctions were filed in multiple courts with conflicting results. Two judges may have overstepped their constitutional authority by applying their rulings nationally rather than just for the plaintiffs. One judge ruled favorably for the Education Department.

Case 1: An Obama-appointed judge in New Hampshire, Landya McCaffery, sided with the plaintiffs and issued an injunction against the Education Department on April 24 for violations of the Administrative Process Act. The plaintiffs were the National Education Association, its New Hampshire affiliate, and the Center for Black Educator Development. McCaffrey enjoined "the defendants from enforcing the 2025 Letter and its implementation measures against one category of parties to the case: entities receiving federal funding that employ or contract with plaintiffs or plaintiffs' members." In layman's terms, any school that employs a member of the NEA or the Center for Black Educator Development is subject to the injunction. Since membership of these organizations are not public, how is the Education Department to know to what institutions the order applies?

Case 2: A Maryland Trump-appointed judge, Stephanie Gallagher, sided mostly against the plaintiffs—the American Federation of Teachers. Gallagher declined to issue an injunction and stated, "This Court does not believe an injunction will be necessary once the stay is effected." Further, the judge denied the plaintiffs’ motion which sought to include other aspects of the Dear Colleague Letter such as "the FAQs and the End DEI Portal." This decision conflicts with the New Hampshire judge's ruling. Judge Gallagher also refused the plaintiff's request to order the Education Department to "enforce Title VI in line with specified prior guidances" and refused to order it "to place those guidances back on its website."

Judge Gallagher did find that the Education Department may not have followed the proper procedures for implementation of the policies based on rules under the Administrative Procedures Act. For that reason, she issued a stay, "to postpone its effective date—under 5 U.S.C. § 705 pending a final resolution in this matter."

Case 3: The lawfare doesn't end with just two cases, as the NAACP also filed a request for injunction in the D.C. courts. The ruling by Trump appointed Judge Dabney Friedrich was different from the other two rulings. She rejected many of the claims made by the NAACP, including violations of the Administrative Process Act, but she approved a preliminary injunction against the Certification requirement due to vagueness of the directive.

These three cases offer conflicting rulings and vary on who is impacted by the decisions. For case 1, the ruling applies only to the members of the plaintiff's organizations, but the judge doesn't explain how the Department of Education is to know who those members are.

Judge Friedrich in case 3 seems to apply her ruling as a nationwide injunction rather than just for the plaintiffs. Does she have this authority? In case 1 even Judge McCaffery acknowledged a nationwide injunction may be beyond her scope of judicial authority saying,

QUOTE The court is mindful, however, that the scope of a district court’s authority to issue nationwide injunctions is unsettled. Members of the Supreme Court have expressed recent skepticism regarding the lawfulness of nationwide injunctions. /QUOTE

The nation spoke loudly in November's election and rejected the discriminatory policies of the Democrats. Yet, the Democrats continue with their same failed narratives which will only serve to backfire on them. The Education Department must press forward and bulldoze the speedbumps put in their way to fight against the heinous discrimination of the Democrats.

(READ MORE: Trump's Education Department Will Enforce Anti-Discrimination Laws)