Order comes same day that other judges, in New Hampshire and D.C., blocked the same ‘Dear Colleague’ letter, but on different grounds

A federal judge in Maryland temporarily blocked the U.S. Department of Education’s attempt to end diversity, equity and inclusion practices in schools by threatening to withhold federal funding from schools that refuse to comply.

U.S. District of Judge Stephanie Gallagher wrote Thursday that the court isn’t required to assess whether policies from the department “are good or bad, prudent or foolish, fair or unfair.”

But the court “is constitutionally required to closely scrutinize whether the government went about creating and implementing them in the manner the law requires. The government did not,” the judge wrote.

“The Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) claim, have demonstrated that they will be irreparably harmed absent preliminary relief, and have shown the equities and public interest favor them,” she wrote in a 48-page ruling .

While Gallagher focused on the process behind the policy, another federal judge blocked the attempted DEI ban based on the effects the policy would have if it was allowed to take effect.

U.S. District Judge Landya McCafferty, in New Hampshire said in her 82-page ruling Thursday that a preliminary injunction was proper because the plaintiffs had shown they were likely to win on their claims that the policy is unconstitutionally vague, that it infringed on teachers’ First Amendment rights, that it would cause actual harm and that it overstepped the federal agency’s authority, among other claims.

And yet another judge, U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich in the District of Columbia, ruled from the bench Thursday that the government could not enforce its demand that schools certify by April 24 that they were in compliance with the anti-DEI rule because the policy was so vague that schools could not know if they were in compliance or not. Threatening the loss of federal funding “without sufficiently defining the conduct that might trigger liability, violates the Fifth Amendment’s prohibition on vagueness,” Friedrich said in a brief 16-page ruling .

The rulings by Friedrich and Gallagher — both of whom were appointed by President Donald Trump (R) in his first term — are effective nationwide. The preliminary injunction by McCafferty, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama (D), is nationwide as well, but only in effect at schools where plaintiffs in her case — the National Education Association, its New Hampshire chapter, and the Center for Black Educator Development — are represented.

Since being sworn in to his second term in January, Trump has pushed for the elimination of diversity, equity and inclusion programs and policies in federal agencies, colleges and universities and K-12 schools.

The lawsuits stem from a Feb. 14 “ Dear Colleague letter ” from the Education Department to schools across the country that reminded K-12 schools, colleges and universities that if they do not comply with civil rights law “face potential loss of federal funding.”

But the letter, and supporting documentation, went on to declare that DEI programs violate the law as just another form of racial discrimination, using terms like “pervasive and repugnant,” “toxic,” and “insidious” instruction that use “crude racial stereotypes” to divide students.

That was followed by an April 3 letter to state education agencies given 10 days — later extended to April 24 — to certify their compliance with federal DEI ban in order to continue receiving federal assistance.

The letter was quickly challenged. In addition to the New Hampshire plaintiffs, the NAACP filed suit in Washington, D.C., and the American Federation of Teachers, its Maryland chapter and the American Sociological Association – later joined by a school district in Eugene, Oregon — sued in Maryland.

YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.

A spokesperson for the Department of Education did not respond to emails Thursday seeking comment on the multiple court rulings. But education advocates were elated.

“Today’s decision from the court affirms what we already know – the Trump administration is unlawfully threatening educators who meet the diverse needs of every student and undermining our public education system,” AFT Maryland President Kenya Campbell said in a statement. “This preliminary injunction pauses the chaos caused by targeting and attacking vital communities and temporarily protects the critical funding schools, from our K-12 schools to our higher education institutions, rely on.”

Derrick Johnson, president and CEO of the NAACP, said in a statement that, “Our fight is far from over, but today’s decision is a victory for Black and Brown students across the country, whose right to an equal education has been directly threatened by this Administration’s corrosive actions and misinterpretations of civil rights law.”

“We look forward to prevailing against their cruel attempts to undermine the mission of the U.S. Department of Education and relegate children of color, students with disabilities, and poor students to a second-class education in a throwback to the era before Brown v. Board of Education,” he said of the 1954 Supreme Court ruling the ended the “separate but equal” doctrine that allowed for segregated schools.

‘Reaffirming its commitment’

While the court challenges were pending, Maryland school officials were working on their own response to the DEI certification letter that had been due to federal officials by Thursday.

According to a letter from State Superintendent Carey Wright, the state will continue to affirm its commitment to upholding civil rights laws. In doing that, all 24 school system superintendents signed a certification of compliance letter that was sent via email to the federal department’s Office of Civil Rights.

Wright also mentions the New Hampshire case, in which the plaintiffs had reached a short-term agreement with the department to delay implementation of the certification, which was extended Thursday by McCafferty’s ruling.

“While MSDE [Maryland State Department of Education] is unaware of any legal authority obligating it to comply with USDE’s request, MSDE is reaffirming its commitment to complying with Title VI and other relevant federal laws,” Wright wrote.

Wright and state Board of Education President Joshua Michael issued a joint statement in a video for stakeholders.

“Above all, our charge remains to ensure that all students have equal access to a high-quality education — all students, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, neighborhood, disability, socioeconomic status, or the language spoken at home, Michael said. “Not only is this our moral calling, but Maryland law gives us this charge.”

As for the case in Maryland, Gallagher did reject the plaintiffs’ request to require that the Trump administration restore DEI and civil rights guidance from previous administrations on its website. She also ruled the current department can maintain an online portal titled “End DEI,” through which community members can report instances of discrimination.

“The government is entitled to express its viewpoint on its website and to maintain a reporting portal for Title VI and Equal Protection concerns, so long as it does not actually pursue enforcement actions that are not in accordance with existing law,” the judge wrote.

Our stories may be republished online or in print under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. We ask that you edit only for style or to shorten, provide proper attribution and link to our website. AP and Getty images may not be republished. Please see our republishing guidelines for use of any other photos and graphics.