Are the President's Actions About Public Schools Legal?

Since Inauguration Day, the Trump administration has attacked public education and inclusive policies, often in direct conflict with existing law.

Here is a deeper look at the legality of the Trump administration’s actions.

View past legal updates:

May 8, 2026
April 24, 2026
April 10, 2026
March 13, 2026
February 27, 2026
February 13, 2026

Legal Rundown PDF archive to March 27, 2025

May 8, 2026

Litigation Updates

SCOTUS Agrees to Gut Core Provision of Voting Rights Act

On April 29, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) issued a 6-3 decision in Louisiana v. Callais that effectively neutered Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which bars racial discrimination in voting. The case — reargued this term after SCOTUS first heard it last year — raised the question of what plaintiffs must show to establish that a redistricted map was drawn based on impermissible considerations of race. Despite the 1982 amendments to the Voting Rights Act directing courts to focus on the effects of redistricting, SCOTUS instead insisted that proof of intent is necessary to strike down maps under Section 2. It further concluded that such intent can only be found when race is the sole explanation for the district lines. Consequently, the Court struck down a Louisiana map that had been drawn to remedy the effective disenfranchisement of Black voters, deeming it an impermissible racial gerrymander. The majority suggested that if a redistricting plan could be explained as a partisan gerrymander, it would largely be insulated from being challenged as a racial gerrymander. In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan wrote that this ruling leaves Section 2 “all but a dead letter.” The Court issued an unsigned, one-paragraph order on May 4 putting its decision into immediate effect, prompting swift efforts in Louisiana and other states to implement new maps ahead of the 2026 elections.

DOJ Sues NJ Over In-State Tuition for Undocumented Students

On April 30, the Department of Justice (DOJ) sued New Jersey over its law allowing undocumented college students to pay in-state tuition, which DOJ claims violates federal law by giving in-state undocumented students access to benefits not available to out-of-state U.S. citizens. DOJ has challenged similar policies in eight other states. Its case against Minnesota was dismissed in March and is on appeal. Litigation is ongoing in California, Illinois, and Virginia, while Texas, Oklahoma, and Kentucky entered consent decrees ending their policies. Nebraska’s proposed consent decree is pending court approval.

District Judge Expands Block on ED’s Demand for Admissions Data

On April 27, a Massachusetts district judge expanded a preliminarily injunction blocking ED from enforcing a requirement that higher education institutions submit admissions data by race and sex. The order, which previously applied to public colleges in 17 plaintiff states, now also covers six private colleges and members of six higher education associations (about 170 additional public institutions). The judge held that the data reporting requirement likely violates the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) due to its “rushed and chaotic” rollout, accelerated implementation timeline, and ED’s failure to meaningfully address concerns raised in public comments.

Recent Executive Actions

Withholding $2 Billion in Education Grants

As of May 6, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is withholding over $2 billion appropriated in the FY 2026 appropriations act for 35 education programs that the Trump Administration had unsuccessfully proposed that Congress defund. The withheld funds includes $235 million for education research, $220 million for teacher preparation and training, $150 million for community schools initiatives, and $139 million for magnet schools.

Proposing DEI Reporting Requirements for Federal Contractors

On May 6, multiple agencies, including the General Services Administration, published a proposed information collection to implement President Trump’s March 2026 executive order (EO) requiring all federal contractors (including higher education institutions) to agree to not engage in “racially discriminatory DEI activities.” The proposal would necessitate that contractors provide information about their own compliance with the EO’s anti-DEI requirements and report potential violations by their subcontractors. Contractors found to be in violation of the EO would risk cancellation of their contracts.

Finalizing New Federal Student Loan Caps

On May 1, the Department of Education (ED) published its final Reimagining and Improving Student Education ("RISE") Rule, which ends the Grad PLUS loan program and implements the One Big Beautiful Bill Act’s limits on the federal student loan aid available to graduate students. Starting in July 2026, new borrowers can take out only $20,500 per year in federal student loans for most graduate programs, but may borrow up to $50,000 per year for certain, very limited “professional degree” programs. The final rule classifies teaching, nursing, and social work degree programs, among others, as “graduate” programs subject to the lower cap. ED received 81,000 comments on its proposed version of this rule, including many raising concerns about the "professional degree” definition.

April 24, 2026

Litigation Updates

SCOTUS to Weigh Religious Exemptions to Preschool Nondiscrimination

On April 20, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear St. Mary Parish v. Roy next term, which asks whether private religious schools that receive public funds from Colorado’s universal preschool program are entitled to exemptions from the program’s nondiscrimination requirements. To receive funding, schools must provide children with an equal opportunity to enroll, regardless of race, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, gender identity, and other factors. The plaintiffs claim that Colorado’s refusal to exempt Catholic preschools from the nondiscrimination provision — so that they are free to reject LGBTQ+ children and families — violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. Both the District Court and the Tenth Circuit ruled in favor of Colorado because the nondiscrimination provisions were neutral and generally applicable and therefore permissible under long established Supreme Court precedent.

Appeals Court Upholds Texas Ten Commandments Law

On April 21, the Fifth Circuit issued a 9-8 en banc decision upholding a Texas law that requires public schools to display the Ten Commandments in classrooms. The court relied on the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Kennedy v. Bremerton, concluding the law does not violate the Establishment Clause because a poster displaying the Commandments would not have offended the founders’ understanding of the prohibited establishment of religion, nor is it coercive or oppressive in violation of the Free Exercise Clause (even if it inspires disagreement). The plaintiffs, who are a multifaith group of Texas families, anticipate seeking review in the Supreme Court. NEA and the Arkansas Education Association filed an amicus brief in the Eighth Circuit in a similar case challenging Arkansas’ Ten Commandments law.

Higher Education Associations Challenge Anti-DEI Federal Contracting EO

On April 20, a coalition of higher education groups and minority contractor associations filed a lawsuit challenging President Trump’s March 2026 executive order (EO) that requires all federal contractors to agree to not engage in “racially discriminatory DEI activities,” or else risk the cancellation of their contracts. The EO also directs the amendment of the Federal Acquisition Regulations to require these conditions in all federal procurements, solicitations, and contracts. The plaintiffs argue that the EO violates their First Amendment rights and exceeds the President’s authority.

DOJ Sues Nebraska Over In-State Tuition for Undocumented Students

On April 21, the Department of Justice (DOJ) sued Nebraska over its law allowing undocumented college students to pay in-state tuition rates and benefit from scholarships, claiming that it is preempted by federal immigration laws. The same day, DOJ and Nebraska officials filed a proposed joint consent decree, asking the court to permanently enjoin the law. The court has not yet ruled. Texas, Oklahoma, and Kentucky have already agreed to end their similar policies through separate consent decrees, while DOJ’s lawsuit against Minnesota was dismissed in March. Challenges are still pending in California, Illinois, and Virginia.

District Court Vacates Magnet School Grant Discontinuation

On April 8, a New York district judge ruled that ED unlawfully discontinued five Magnet School Assistance Program grants for New York City Public Schools over their trans-inclusive policies. The court found that ED failed to follow required Title IX procedures when it ended the grants (including findings and an opportunity for voluntary compliance) and ordered the funding restored within 10 days of the order.

Recent Executive Actions

Closing ED Office for English Language Acquisition

On February 13, in a letter only made public this week, the Department of Education (ED) notified Congress of plans to formally dissolve its Office of English Language Acquisition (OELA), after dismissing nearly all its staff in 2025. OELA administers $890 million in Title III grants for English language learners and $60 million in teacher professional development grants, both of which will move to other ED offices. Although the letter says that OELA’s Native American and Alaska Native Children in School Program will also be transferred internally, ED previously entered into an interagency agreement shifting program administration to the Department of the Interior. The letter provides Congress with 90 days’ notice, which means that ED can initiate these actions starting May 14.

Claiming School “Forced Outing” Prevention Policies Violate FERPA

On April 17, ED found four Kansas school districts violated the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) by having policies that protect against the unwanted disclosure of a student’s gender identity or sexual orientation to parents (known as “forced outing”). ED uses its March 2025 Dear Colleague Letter as a basis for claiming that such student privacy policies may violate parents’ rights under FERPA to access their students’ education records. ED is demanding that districts make documents related to "gender transition" readily accessible to parents and rescind any trans-inclusive policies, or else risk losing federal funding.

Proposing New College Accountability Metrics

On April 17, ED proposed a new accountability rule requiring programs at over 4,000 higher education institutions to show that graduates earn more than comparable degree holders (high school for undergraduate programs, bachelor’s for graduate programs). Programs that fail twice within three years could lose access to federal loans and, in some cases, Pell Grants. This could reduce financial aid access for educator preparation programs, where earnings are typically lower. Public comment is open until May 20, and the rule is slated to take effect on July 1.

April 10, 2026

Litigation Updates

SCOTUS Invalidates Colorado Ban on Conversion Talk Therapy for Minors

On April 2, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an 8-1 decision in Chiles v. Salazar that invalidated a Colorado law barring “conversion therapy” — a practice meant to alter a minor’s gender identity or sexual orientation — through “talk therapy.” The Court held that this application of the law violated the First Amendment by discriminating on the basis of viewpoint, prohibiting therapists’ speech that endeavors to change their client’s identity while permitting speech that affirms a client’s identity. Although the decision will impact state laws that prohibit conversion therapy, it addresses only talk therapy, not medical interventions. Further, the decision’s reasoning would also invalidate a state law that prohibits LGBTQ-affirming talk therapy and thus may protect LGBTQIA+ youth in hostile states.

SCOTUS Hears Birthright Citizenship Case

On April 1, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara, one of several cases challenging President Trump’s executive order (EO) purporting to eliminate birthright citizenship. The case reached the Supreme Court after a New Hampshire district court (like every other court to consider the EO) blocked the Administration from enforcing the order last July. After the argument, the Court is widely expected to invalidate the EO. NEA joined an amicus brief along with 18 other labor organizations in support of birthright citizenship.

District Judge Dismisses DOJ Challenge to MN In-State Tuition Policy

On March 27, a Minnesota district judge dismissed a Department of Justice (DOJ) lawsuit that challenged the state’s policy allowing undocumented students to pay in-state tuition at public colleges and universities. This is the first ruling against DOJ’s campaign to end in-state tuition for undocumented students, with lawsuits still pending in California, Illinois, and Virginia. Texas, Oklahoma, and Kentucky agreed in consent judgments to end their policies.

District Judge Blocks ED’s Demand for Admissions Data

On April 3, a Massachusetts district judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of a new Department of Education (ED) requirement that colleges and universities collect and submit admissions data by race and sex. The requirement is purportedly to ensure compliance with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admission v. Harvard College. The judge found that, while ED has “the basic authority” to collect and analyze admissions data, the new requirement violated the APA because of its “rushed and chaotic” adoption, its accelerated implementation timeline, and ED’s failure to meaningfully address concerns raised in public comments. The injunction applies only to the public university systems in the 17 plaintiff states, not to public universities in the non-plaintiff states or to private colleges and universities.

State Coalition Sues USDA Over Funding Threats to School Meal Programs

On March 23, 21 states sued the Department of Agriculture (USDA), challenging new grant conditions that require recipients to certify that they will not use federal funds to “promote gender ideology” or provide “taxpayer-funded benefits” to undocumented individuals. Among other critical funding, the plaintiff states collectively risk losing at least $11.6 billion in funds to feed children through the Child Nutrition Program, which includes the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs.

Recent Executive Actions

Prohibiting Federal Contractors from DEI Practices

On March 26, President Trump issued an executive order (EO) requiring all federal contractors, including higher education institutions, to agree to “not engage in any racially discriminatory DEI activities” or else risk the cancellation of their contracts. Contractors must provide records to demonstrate compliance and report violations by subcontractors. The EO suggests that violations of these requirements would expose contractors to liability under the False Claims Act. Federal agencies must add this language to their contracts by April 25 and audit contractors’ compliance by July 24.

Increasing Restrictions on Absentee Voting

On March 31, President Trump issued an EO directing the Department of Homeland Security to provide state election officials with lists of eligible voters. Election officials who provide ballots to individuals not on those lists would be subject to prosecution. The order also requires the U.S. Postal Service to promulgate regulations mandating the creation of pre‑approved lists of eligible mail‑in voters and prohibits USPS from delivering mail‑in or absentee ballots to voters not on those lists.

Rescinding Resolution Agreements that Support Trans Students

On April 6, in an unprecedented move, ED announced that its Office for Civil Rights (OCR) is rescinding portions of six agreements with school districts and colleges to resolve complaints of gender-based discrimination against transgender students, in violation of Title IX.

Proposing Federal Education FY 2027 Budget Cuts

On April 3, the Trump Administration released a “skinny budget” proposal for the 2027 fiscal year that would reduce education funding by a net $2.3 billion, or a 3% cut. This includes $8.5 billion in cuts to around 30 K-12 programs, including 17 ESEA programs and most IDEA programs other than Part B formula grants to states, which would be consolidated into two block grant programs. The proposal also requests that Congress appropriate funding for federal career and technical education programs — which are required by statute to be run through ED — to the Department of Labor (DOL), formalizing the Administration's transfer of these programs from ED to DOL through a May 2025 interagency agreement.

Transferring Student Loan Programs to the Treasury Department

On March 19, ED announced a new interagency agreement (IAA) to transfer the Office of Federal Student Aid (FSA), which administers the $1.7 trillion federal student loan portfolio, to the Department of Treasury (Treasury). In the first phase of the IAA, Treasury will take over debt collection on defaulted student loans, and in subsequent phases, will “assume operational responsibility” over non-defaulted loans as well as FSA’s administrative and oversight functions for federal student aid programs.

March 13, 2026

Federal Litigation Updates

NEA Joins Suit Challenging Community Schools Grant Cancellations

On February 27, NEA joined a lawsuit brought by a coalition of unions, school districts, and nonprofit groups challenging the Department of Education’s (ED) discontinuation of $132 million in Full Service Community Schools grants, which support district programs to provide academic, social, and health services for students, families, and communities at high-poverty schools. The lawsuit claims that ED did not follow the legally required process to cancel the grants and that the discontinuations violated the First Amendment by targeting grants that allegedly promoted disfavored DEI activities.

SCOTUS Halts California Limits on Student LGBTQ+ Disclosure to Parents

On March 2, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an unsigned shadow-docket order in Mirabelli v. Bonta, blocking California’s policies that prohibited schools from disclosing students’ LGBTQ+ identities to their parents without the student’s consent. The Court found that these policies likely violate parents’ First Amendment right to control their children’s religious upbringing and due process right to be involved in decisions regarding their children’s gender identities. The ruling expands on last Term’s decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor, which recognized a First Amendment right for parents to opt their children out of lessons and curricular materials, including LGBTQ+ characters and topics on religious grounds.

Appeals Court Denies ED Stay in School-Based Mental Health Grant Case

On February 26, the Ninth Circuit denied ED's motion to stay a district court order in a case brought by 15 state Attorneys General, which requires the Department to reconsider its termination of 138 School-Based Mental Health grants in the plaintiff states. The order followed the district court’s final decision that the discontinuations were unlawful. The Ninth Circuit held that ED was not likely to show that the district court erred in finding the cancellations illegal and therefore must comply with its order.

Appeals Court Clears Path for Trump Anti-Union Executive Order

On February 26th, the Ninth Circuit vacated a district court’s preliminary injunction blocking a March 2025 executive order (EO) that stripped collective bargaining rights from employees of certain federal agencies on national security grounds. The court found that the union plaintiffs were unlikely to succeed on their claim that the EO unconstitutionally retaliated against them for suing the Trump Administration. NEA has also filed a lawsuit challenging the EO and won a preliminary injunction restoring the bargaining rights of educators in DoDEA schools. The government’s appeal of that preliminary injunction is pending.

District Court Allows Challenge to Dismantling of IES to Proceed

On February 25, the District of Columbia district court denied the Trump Administration’s motion to dismiss two lawsuits challenging the dismantling of ED’s Institute of Education Sciences (IES), allowing the case to move forward. The court held that the plaintiffs — organizations of education researchers and policy advocates — had plausibly alleged concrete harms and that dismantling the IES programs was unlawful.

State Litigation Updates

Kentucky Supreme Court Finds Charter School Law Unconstitutional

On February 19, Kentucky’s Supreme Court struck down the state’s charter school law, finding that the law unconstitutionally directed public funds to charter schools that do not qualify as “common schools” as defined in the state constitution. Voters had previously rejected a state constitutional amendment that would have allowed public funds to be used for charter and private schools.

WEAC Sues Wisconsin Legislature Over School Funding Formula

On February 23, the Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC), along with a coalition of unions, parents, districts, and advocates, filed a lawsuit alleging that the Wisconsin State Legislature has chronically underfunded the state’s public schools and thus violated its constitutional duty to provide all students with a “sound basic education.” The legislature repealed a mechanism to increase public-school funding to account for inflation in 2009, and since then, has passed laws prioritizing funding for private school vouchers and independent charter schools. The plaintiffs argue that this underfunding has forced districts to lay off educators, increase class sizes, and cut required programs and thus has caused a decline in student achievement.

Appeals Court Affirms Free Speech Rights of California Elementary Student

On March 10, the Ninth Circuit joined four other courts of appeals in affirming that elementary school students have First Amendment free speech rights at school. The unanimous opinion emphasized that, under the First Amendment, school officials must demonstrate that any interference with protected student speech was reasonably necessary to prevent disruption or protect student well-being, taking into account the age of elementary students. The case was brought on behalf of a California first-grader who was suspended from recess for sharing an allegedly offensive drawing with a classmate and reached the Ninth Circuit after a district court found that the drawing was not protected speech. The panel remanded for the district court to determine whether the first-grader’s suspension was reasonably necessary or unconstitutional.

On January 28, the General Services Administration (GSA) published a notice of a proposed revision to government-wide pre-award registration requirements that would require current and potential recipients of federal funding through any agency to certify that they will not: engage in disfavored DEI programs; promote the “freedom of speech and religious liberty”; transport, conceal, harbor, or otherwise assist “illegal alien[s]”; or fund, subsidize, or facilitate “violence, terrorism, or other illegal activities that threaten public safety or national security.” The certification requirement not only would allow the government to deny federal funding to entities that do not agree to these conditions, but also opens up the possibility of criminal enforcement and civil liability under the False Claims Act for recipients who complete the certification and engage in activity that the Administration determines to violate one of the conditions. The notice is open for public comment until March 30.

Offloading ED Programs to HHS and State

On February 23, the Department of Education (ED) announced two new interagency agreements (IAAs) to further offload its required programs onto other agencies. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will take over administration of multiple grant programs focused on school safety, student mental health, and supporting under-funded communities, including School Based Mental Health Grants and Full-Service Community Schools Grants. The Department of State (State) will take over enforcement of a Higher Education Act requirement that colleges and universities disclose foreign gifts of $250,000 or more and accompanying management of the foreign funding reporting portal.

Reaching Resolution Agreements with 31 Higher Ed Institutions

On February 19, ED announced 31 resolution agreements with institutions of higher education (IHEs), in which ED found that the IHEs’ partnerships with “The Ph.D. Project,” a nonprofit that supports students of color pursuing doctoral degrees, violated Title VI and the IHEs agreed to terminate the partnerships. ED opened investigations into 45 IHEs for these partnerships last March based on its interpretation of Title VI as prohibiting disfavored DEI initiatives.

Litigation Updates

NEA Victory: ED’s Anti-DEI Guidance Permanently Blocked

On February 18, a New Hampshire district court issued a final judgment in a lawsuit brought by NEA, ACLU, and other partners last year challenging ED’s February 14, 2025 Dear Colleague Letter and subsequent Certification Requirement that sought to restrict DEI efforts in schools and higher education institutions nationwide. The court dismissed the case without prejudice after ED conceded in a joint stipulation that the letter and certification requirement are vacated and agreed not to enforce them. ED’s concession follows a Maryland district court’s final judgment invalidating the agency actions.

SCOTUS Rejects Trump Administration’s Tariffs

On February 20, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled, in a 6-3 decision, that President Trump lacked power to impose sweeping tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), the 1977 law the Administration cited to justify the policy. Chief Justice Roberts, joined by Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, Gorsuch, Barrett, and Jackson, held that IEEPA’s grant of authority for the President to “regulate . . . importation” does not allow him to impose tariffs. Justices Kavanaugh, Alito, and Thomas dissented.

California Sues ED Over Parental Notification Policy

On February 11, California filed a lawsuit challenging ED’s threat to withhold $4.9 billion in federal education funding on the grounds that a state law prohibiting mandatory disclosure of students’ gender identities violates the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). ED has demanded that the state adopt a policy of affirmatively notifying parents of any changes to students’ gender identities. The state argues that its law complies with FERPA and ED’s threat to withhold funding violates the Constitution’s Spending Clause and the APA. A California district court granted a temporary restraining order prohibiting ED from withholding funds until the merits of the motion are fully resolved.

Appeals Court Allows Louisiana Ten Commandments Bill to Move Forward

On February 20, the en banc 5th Circuit vacated a Louisiana district court’s preliminary injunction blocking a state law that requires public schools to permanently display the Ten Commandments in every classroom. The unsigned opinion overturned a panel order denying the state’s motion to stay the preliminary injunction. It held that the challenge to the law was premature because classrooms have not yet posted the Ten Commandments and the courts thus cannot decide whether the displays violate the First Amendment in context. NEA and the Arkansas Education Association have filed an amicus brief in a similar case challenging Arkansas’ Ten Commandments law.

February 13, 2026

Recent Executive Actions

Failing to Investigate Thousands of Civil Rights Cases

On February 2, the Government Accountability Office released a report examining how the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) at the Department of Education (ED) has functioned following the March 2025 RIF, which halved its workforce and cost more than $28.5 million in salaries and benefits for laid-off staff. Although OCR resolved over 7,000 of the more than 9,000 new complaints it received between March and September 2025, it dismissed 90% of the resolved cases without investigation (compared to 49%-81% dismissal rates in prior years). Meanwhile, media reports indicate OCR’s case backlog grew from around 12,000 open investigations in January 2025 to roughly 25,000 by January 2026. During that time, OCR disclosed just 177 resolution agreements (compared to 518 in 2024), none of which involved racial harassment. Likewise, none of the disclosed Title IX case resolutions involved sexual assault, sexual harassment, gender harassment, or pregnancy/parental status discrimination; instead, one quarter concerned policies permitting the inclusion of transgender students in athletics.

Signing $79B Education Funding Bill Into Law

On February 3, President Trump signed the FY 2026 budget bill into law. The bill funds ED at $79 billion, rejecting the deep cuts to federal education funding proposed by the Trump Administration. The law requires ED to distribute formula grant funding to states and districts on time and to maintain sufficient staffing to fulfill its statutory responsibilities. These mandates appear to be a rebuke of ED’s withholding of billions in formula grant dollars for weeks last summer and elimination of about half of its career staff over the past year. The bill also continues a longstanding restriction prohibiting ED from transferring appropriated funds to other agencies.

Issuing Guidance Allowing Teacher Prayer in Public Schools

On February 5, ED issued guidance claiming that public school employees may engage in religious expression — including “visible, personal prayer” with students — “during the conduct of their work.” ED interprets the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District to mean that educators’ religious expression at school only violates the First Amendment if it is offered “on behalf of the school or in contexts that students cannot opt out of” or is otherwise coercive. In ED’s view, the simple fact of prayer being visible to students is not itself coercive. The move replaces ED’s 2023 guidance on religious expression in public schools, which maintained that educators may engage in private prayer during the workday, but could not do so while carrying out official duties and could not encourage or discourage students’ participation in religious activities.

Litigation Updates

NEA Files Emergency Motion to Stop ICE Enforcement Near Schools

On February 12, NEA filed an emergency motion for relief in a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s January 2025 rescission of a longstanding policy limiting immigration enforcement at “sensitive locations,” such as schools, hospitals, courthouses, and churches. The motion, which argues that the policy change is arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and irreparably harms educators around the country, is supported by testimony from 60 teachers and health care workers from 18 states. Earlier last week, Education Minnesota and two Minnesota school districts also filed a lawsuit seeking to restore the sensitive locations policy. The complaint similarly alleges that the rescission violated the APA and its implementation at or near Minnesota public schools has caused significant disruption, including school closures and declines in attendance.

Appeals Court Vacates Injunction Blocking Anti-DEI Executive Orders

On February 6, the Fourth Circuit vacated a preliminary injunction that blocked implementation of two executive orders (EOs) targeting DEI practices in the federal government and private sectors, including higher education. While the plaintiffs lacked standing for some claims and were unlikely to succeed in showing other EO provisions were facially unconstitutional, the court left open the possibility that use of the EOs in specific enforcement actions could be unlawful. The case has been remanded to the lower court.

Academic Labor Union Challenges Trump’s “Gold Card” Executive Order

On February 3, the American Association of University Professors and several prospective visa applicants filed a lawsuit challenging Trump’s “Gold Card” visa program, which fast tracks applicants who pay $1 million under visa programs designed to admit highly talented individuals to the United States based on their merit and ability. Plaintiffs argue that the “Gold Card” program exceeds the President’s authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act by changing the statutory criteria for the impacted visa programs and violates the APA. They are seeking declaratory and injunctive relief.