Confrontation Ahead: Trump’s Ban on DEI in Public Schools
Low-income rural districts that issue DEI statements as mandated by state law, yet do not actively implement these practices, find themselves in a difficult position.
Many blue states have joined New York in opposing federal attempts to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in public education.
Officials in California, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, Wisconsin, and Washington have announced that they will not submit a signed statement to the federal government by the April 24 deadline, to confirm compliance with President Donald Trump’s executive order that bans practices such as diversity training, race- and gender-based affinity groups, racially preferential hiring, and educational content featuring progressive ideas like critical race theory.
The federal correspondence addressed to state education agencies requested that leadership report on behalf of all school districts. New York was the first to reject this request, and other states followed suit last week.
States and districts that fail to comply risk losing federal education funding under Civil Rights law and a recent Supreme Court decision that nullified racial preferences in college admissions, as mentioned in the federal letter.
The position of other states in this situation remains unclear. The Department of Education has informed The Epoch Times that Puerto Rico, a U.S. territory, has complied with the order, but updates regarding individual states have not been provided.
Related Stories
Rural districts in states that are against the order find themselves in a challenging situation. Many rely on higher proportions of federal Title 1 funding compared to urban districts as they serve student populations from low-income families and lack a robust property tax base.
School administrators mention that these districts maintain DEI statements on their websites to comply with years-old state laws but do not actively implement practices like affinity groups for minority teachers or students, nor do they mandate culturally inclusive teaching methods.
Jaime Green, the superintendent of the Trinity Alps Unified district in Northern California, which depends on federal funds to compensate for tax-exempt forest land, stated that he has not received any communication from his state’s Department of Education regarding compliance in this matter.
“I hope that locally elected board members will be considered in each state’s decision, as we believe in local control,” Green expressed to The Epoch Times.
David Little, executive director of the New York State Rural Schools Association, noted that rural districts in New York have faced significant enrollment declines over the past ten years. Most of these districts depend on state funding tied to enrollment rather than property taxes or federal aid, making it essential for them to comply with state mandates such as DEI statements for hiring, inclusive practices for all students, and required Board of Education diversity committees.
“For rural schools, this is all they know,” he stated. “You’re focused on educating students, not on managing compliance.”
In contrast, the two largest school districts in the country have established guidelines for implementing race- or gender identity-based programs.
Both national teachers unions, the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers, have initiated federal lawsuits challenging the legality and constitutionality of the Trump administration’s DEI certification mandate.
Meanwhile, several states are also moving forward with legislation that promotes DEI, including culturally responsible education mandates in Delaware, apprenticeship and placement programs for teachers of color in Hawaii, mandatory “LGBTQIA+” diversity training in Illinois, and required task forces to study and promote diversity in New York State public schools.
Jonathan Butcher, an education policy research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, stated that it remains uncertain how the Trump administration will react post-April 24 deadline; federal agencies might scrutinize each state more closely and audit individual districts similar to previous actions taken under comparable orders for colleges and universities.
“The state has already withheld funding from districts,” he informed The Epoch Times. “I believe the administration is acting well within its authority. If a state challenges this and tests the waters, the administration has proven to be quite serious.”
Butcher also pointed out that federal education funding, primarily aimed at low-income and special education students, typically represents less than 10 percent of a school district’s total revenue.
He expressed concern that some state education superintendents declared their non-compliance without obtaining feedback from all district representatives, yet it should also not be presumed that rural districts, even in red states, are eager to comply with the order.
“There are mandated affinity groups that convene during lunch in South Carolina,” he noted. “Yes, this is happening across districts of various types.”
Butcher stressed that the fundamental premise behind the Trump administration’s initiative to dismantle the Department of Education is that states and school districts should have the autonomy to make their own choices. If they decide to uphold DEI practices and forfeit federal funds, then taxpayers who support leaders opposing such practices should not have to bear the financial burden.
The former president had previously issued an executive order aiming to facilitate the dissolution of the Department of Education, and Education Secretary Linda McMahon has already reduced the agency’s workforce by half. Additionally, the special education functions for K-12 schools have been reassigned to the Department of Health and Human Services, while the Small Business Administration will now manage student loans.
If states and school districts can continue to implement DEI programs without federal funding, Butcher argued, “they didn’t require Washington’s involvement in the first place.”
