Each week, Liebert Cassidy Whitmore provides a summary of newly issued Executive Orders and other significant Presidential and federal actions that have a foreseeable impact on governance, compliance, and operational policies for California employers. The summaries below outline the key provisions of each action, along with our brief analysis of their potential implications for municipal agencies, school districts, nonprofits, and private schools.
Department of Education to Condition K-12 School Funding on Elimination of DEI Programs (April 3, 2025)
On April 3, 2025, the United States Department of Education issued a notice entitled “Reminder of Legal Obligations Undertaken in Exchange for Receiving Federal Financial Assistance and Request for Certification Under Title VI and SFFA v. Harvard.”[1]
The notice advises that the Department may revoke K-12 public school districts’ Title I funding—federal funding for K-12 districts with a high percentage of low-income students—unless the districts certify compliance with federal antidiscrimination laws. Specifically, the notice states the Department’s position that “the use of Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion (“DEI”) programs to advantage one’s race over another” violates antidiscrimination law.
State education agencies (SEAs) and local education agencies (LEAs) must sign and return the certification to the Department within 10 days.
In a press release the Department referenced only SEAs and LEAs in connection with the certification requirement and did not mention private schools. Nonetheless, consistent with the notice, private schools that accept federal funding should assess whether they comply with SFFA v. Harvard, Title VI, and other applicable federal anti-discrimination laws.
LCW is available to assist public and private schools in reviewing policies and navigating recent developments in federal anti-discrimination law.
[1] SFFA v. Harvard is shorthand for Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College (2023) 600 U.S. 181.
U.S. Department of Education and Department of Justice Announce Title IX Special Investigations Team (April 4, 2025)
On April 4, 2025, the U.S. Department of Education and Department of Justice announced the creation of a joint “Title IX Special Investigations Team” (SIT) comprised of investigators from across each Department’s offices.
The stated purpose of the Title IX SIT is to streamline investigations into the uptick of Title IX claims that the Trump administration attributes to what it describes as the “pernicious effects of gender ideology in school programs and activities.”
The Title IX SIT will enforce Title IX consistent with President Trump’s Executive Orders entitled “Keeping Men out of Women’s Sports” and “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism.”
The Title IX SIT may accelerate the pace of investigation and enforcement of Title IX with respect to public and private educational entities that receive federal funds.
Supreme Court Allows Trump Administration to Freeze $65 Million in Department of Education Teacher Training Grants (April 4, 2025)
The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, granted the Trump administration’s emergency request to vacate a Massachusetts federal judge’s temporary restraining order requiring the U.S. Department of Education to reinstate $65 million in teacher training grants for eight states (California, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Wisconsin).
The Department of Education issued the grants under the Teacher Quality Partnership (TQP) and Supporting Effective Educator Development (SEED) programs, established to provide training to prospective teachers in underserved areas and areas with teacher shortages. Many of the grants go to colleges and universities that offer teacher training for local school districts. The Department of Education terminated all but five of the existing 109 grants under the programs in early February because it found that recipients used the funds for unlawful diversity, equity and inclusion programs.
The Supreme Court ruled that the district court likely lacked jurisdiction under the Administrative Procedure Act, and the case instead falls under the Tucker Act, which directs disputes about contracts with the U.S. government to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. The Court also found that the states indicated that they have enough money to be able to continue their programs without the federal funding while the litigation moves forward.
The case now returns to the district court, where a decision on a preliminary injunction is expected soon.
This ruling directly impacts educational institutions that receive TQP and SEED grants.