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:

April 3, 2025
March 27, 2025

April 10, 2025

Is it Legal for the President to Demand K-12 Public School End DEI Initiatives or Risk Losing Funding?

On April 3rd, the Department of Education (ED) sent a letter to State Commissioners overseeing K-12 State Education Agencies requiring them to certify their compliance with its February 14 Dear Colleague Letter. The Letter suggests that certain DEI initiatives discriminate on the basis of race and are in violation of Title VI. Schools will have until April 24 to certify that they have ended any such DEI programs or else risk losing federal funding. Massachusetts, New York, and Washington have already alerted federal officials that they will not provide the requested certification, and several other states have indicated that they plan to not provide the certification as well.

Is it Legal for the President to Continue to Freeze University Federal Funds Over Alleged Antisemitism?

As of April 8, the Trump administration has frozen a combined total of more than $3 billion in federal funds across six universities: Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Northwestern, Penn, and Princeton. ED has also warned Harvard University that it will lose up to $9 billion unless it reforms antisemitism and admissions policies, bans masks for nonmedical purposes, reviews academic departments to “end ideological capture,” and provides “full cooperation” with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Harvard appears to be taking steps to comply. Alleged failure to address antisemitism on campus is the justification for these freezes, but the remedies sought often go far beyond the alleged concerns. ED has launched civil rights investigations into all of these institutions, as directed by Trump’s executive order.

Is it Legal for the President to Launch Investigations into Schools Over Alleged Title IX Violations?

In response to Trump’s executive orders on "gender ideology” and transgender athlete bans, the Education and Justice Departments announced the creation of a special investigations team within ED’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) to more rapidly resolve investigations and ensure that cases are “fully prepared for ultimate DOJ enforcement.” The special investigations team will include OCR investigators and attorneys, along with attorneys from the Justice Department’s civil right division and ED’s general counsel’s office. The investigative team announced on April 4 a directed investigation into the California Department of Education “for their alleged failure to protect women’s sports.”

Is it Legal for the President to Remove Books and Eliminate DEI Initiatives at U.S. Military Academies?

In response to orders from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, the U.S. Naval Academy has removed nearly 400 books deemed to promote DEI from its library. The nation's five military academies were told in February to eliminate admissions “quotas” related to sex, ethnicity, or race after Trump signed an executive order to remove “any preference based on race or sex” from the military. West Point and the Air Force and Naval academies have also done curriculum reviews to remove materials that allegedly promote DEI. DODEA schools also have seen widespread efforts to censor school libraries and educational programming.

Soliciting Feedback to Deregulate Federal Financial Assistance Programs

On April 3, ED announced public hearings as a first step in a negotiated rulemaking to “streamline” federal student aid programs, including the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program (PSLF), the Pay As You Earn (PAYE) Repayment plan, and the Income-Contingent Repayment (ICR) plan. While the specific changes ED seeks to make remain unclear, this process is in response to Trump’s executive order calling on ED to limit PSLF eligibility for organizations it believes violate federal immigration laws or subsidize other “illegal activities,” including by supporting transgender children seeking gender-affirming care. The rulemaking process typically takes at least one year to complete.

Litigation Updates

The U.S. Supreme Court Allows Trump to Cancel Millions of Dollars in Education Grants

On April 4, the Supreme Court stayed, in a 5-4 decision, a Massachusetts federal court’s temporary restraining order that directed ED to restore $65 million in canceled teacher training grants while the court considered a challenge to the grants’ cancellation. These grants were originally terminated by the Trump administration for funding programs it deemed to be DEI initiatives. The unsigned decision by the 5 Justices in the majority said the district court likely lacked jurisdiction under the Administrative Procedure Act to issue the order and that the plaintiffs had failed to show that ED could recover funds allocated under the order if the government ultimately prevailed in the case.

IHEP and AEFP Sue Over McMahon’s Cuts to Institute of Education Sciences

The Institute for Higher Education Policy and the Association for Education Finance and Policy filed a lawsuit on April 4 over cuts to the Institute of Education Sciences (IES). The Trump administration fired 80% of the agency’s staff and terminated $900 million in contracts, including many for congressionally mandated surveys, reports, and research studies. The lawsuit argues that these actions exceeded the administration’s authority, violating the constitutional separation of power and interfering with the agency’s statutory responsibilities to collect and disseminate data.

Massachusetts Judge Blocks Cap on NIH Funding

Colleges and universities that rely on the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for research funding received a favorable decision when a federal district court in Massachusetts permanently barred NIH from capping or cutting funding. These changes, if put into effect, would have cost institutions of higher education billions of dollars each year. NIH has appealed the ruling to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

Trump’s Recent Executive Actions Undermining Education

Is it Legal for the President to Open Investigations into 50+ Universities for DEI Practices?

The Department of Education (ED) is investigating more than 50 higher education institutions over DEI practices based on its February 14 Dear Colleague Letter, which contends that DEI initiatives discriminate on the basis of race. Forty-five of these universities are under investigation for having partnered with the Ph.D. Project, a nonprofit with programs limited to participants of color. Seven others face allegations of “impermissible race-based scholarships and race-based segregation.”

Is it Legal for the President to Impose University Funding Freezes Over Antisemitism Concerns?

ED has warned Columbia University that it will permanently lose federal funding unless it places its Middle Eastern, South Asian, and African Studies Department under receivership, bans identity-concealing masks, and reforms its policies on antisemitism, student discipline, and admissions. These demands follow the Trump administration’s freeze of $400 million in federal funding to the University, citing its alleged failure to curb antisemitism on campus. Despite the University making several of these concessions, ED has not lifted the freeze. Similarly, nearly $9 billion in federal contracts and grants are also currently under review at Harvard University on the basis of similar concerns.

Is it Legal for the President to Cut Funds to Enforce Transgender Athlete Bans?

The Trump administration has threatened to suspend millions of dollars in federal funding at the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Maine for alleged violations of Trump’s executive order banning transgender student athletes from competing on female sports teams. While the University of Maine has since complied, Maine’s Department of Education has refused and now faces potential federal enforcement actions, as ED alleges that Maine has violated Title IX.

Is it Legal for the President to Cancel Final COVID Relief Aid Payouts?

Education Secretary Linda McMahon announced that ED will halt the final payouts of federal pandemic relief funds to state governments and school districts, reversing a Biden era initiative that granted deadline extensions so that schools could spend the funds on pre-approved projects through early next year. McMahon has noted that state governments can reapply for extensions on individual projects if they can justify ongoing pandemic-related needs for American students.

Is it Legal for the President to Target Green Card and Student Visa Holders for Deportation?

Multiple foreign students and faculty who engaged in pro-Palestinian demonstrations last year have been taken into custody by ICE and threatened with deportation, despite being green card holders. This began on March 8 with the detention of Columbia graduate Mahmoud Khalil, the lead negotiator for Columbia University’s pro-Palestinian encampments. The Trump administration has also revoked at least 300 student visas, which are an easier target for the federal government as they do not require a judge’s approval to revoke.

Can the President Frame Title I Funds as Tool for School Choice?

As a follow-up to Trump’s executive order on school choice, on March 31, ED issued a guidance that highlights two provisions in Title I that it argues gives states “discretion to provide greater flexibility to support parents’ choices for their child’s education.” According to the guidance, under these provisions, states may use Title I funds for direct student services like advanced coursework, dual enrollment, and tutoring outside of a public-school setting. However, the guidance stops short of expanding private school vouchers and does not introduce new policies.

Litigation Updates

Maryland Judge Orders Department of Education to Restart Teacher Prep Grants

On March 19, a federal district court judge in Maryland ruled that the Trump Administration's termination of $600 million in teacher training grants over DEI efforts was unconstitutional. The judge has ordered ED to restore funding for certain programs within five business days, following an order made the previous week by a federal judge in Massachusetts, directing ED to reinstate canceled grants in eight states. The Trump administration has since appealed the order in the Massachusetts case to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking to vacate the ruling, and has asked the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals to stay the Maryland order until the Supreme Court issues a decision.

Appeals Court Rules Trump Can Fire Independent Federal Board Members

On March 28, a federal appeals court ruled that Trump can dismiss members of independent federal boards overseeing labor disputes and federal employee grievances. This decision temporarily pauses a lower court’s order that reinstated the dismissed members of the National Labor Relations and Merit Systems Protection boards. While federal law restricts a president’s ability to remove board members who oversee independent regulatory agencies, the Trump administration has argued that these limitations are unconstitutional. It is expected that the Supreme Court will eventually weigh in on this issue.

Is it legal for the president to eliminate the Department of Education?

The Trump administration has aggressively moved to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education (ED), issuing an EO on March 20th that instructs the Secretary of Education to take “all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of [ED] and return education authority to the states.” This directive follows a 50% reduction in ED’s staffing, along with the termination of $1.5billion in contracts and grants, rendering many offices non-functional.

Is it Legal for the President to Slash Federal Funding for DEI Efforts?

On February 14th, the U.S. Department of Education published a “Dear Colleague” letter warning schools that they could lose federal funding for advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). The letter claims, without evidence, that discrimination exists “in every facet of academia” and condemns DEI programs for promoting discussions of systemic racism. Schools were given until February 28, 2025, to comply with the directive or risk losing federal funding.

Is it Legal for the President to Roll Back Protections for Transgender and LGBTQ+ Individuals?

On his first day in office, Trump issued an executive order mandating that federal agencies recognize only two genders based on biological sex at conception. He later signed an EO banning transgender and intersex athletes from female sports teams and facilities, which followed a Dear Colleague Letter issued by ED stripping away the Biden administration’s explicit protections for LGBTQ+ students.

Is it Legal for the President to Undermine Public Education Funding?

On January 29, Trump issued an executive order directing federal agencies to explore ways to use existing funding programs to support private and religious school vouchers. It tasks the Department of Education with promoting K-12 school choice and instructs other agencies to assess how other funding mechanisms could expand access to private education.

Is it Legal for the President to Penalize K-12 Educators for Supporting Gender Equity

On January 29, Trump signed an executive order directing federal agencies to develop a plan to eliminate funding used in K-12 schools to support “equity” and “gender ideology.” It echoes a similar 2020 executive order that courts deemed impermissibly vague. Most notably, it instructs the Attorney General to coordinate with prosecutors to take legal action against educators who allegedly violate parental rights—particularly those who support transgender students in socially transitioning.

Is it Legal for the President to Prohibit “Divisive Concepts” in Department of Defense Schools?

On January 27, Trump passed an executive order banning military-run schools from teaching “divisive concepts” about race, sex, and gender identity. The directive also mandates that curriculum emphasize American exceptionalism. Additionally, it orders the Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security to conduct a sweeping review of leadership, instructors, and curriculum to ensure compliance with this directive.

NEA’s Legal Challenges Against Federal Overreach

Given that many of the Trump administration’s executive actions are in direct conflict with existing law, NEA has sued the administration to curb unlawful efforts that threaten the rights of students, parents, and educators:

NEA and ACLU Sue U.S. Department of Education Over February 14th Dear Colleague Letter

On March 5, NEA and ACLU filed suit challenging the U.S. Department of Education’s “Dear Colleague” letter that imposes impermissibly vague restrictions on DEI efforts and threatens federal funding cuts.

The lawsuit argues that the Education Department exceeded its authority, using the Letter to violate the First and Fifth Amendments and suppress academic freedom. Educators nationwide are already feeling the chilling effects of the department’s overreach and have reported growing fears of disciplinary action for teaching honest and inclusive curricula.

NEA, NAACP, and Broad Coalition Sue Trump Administration for Attempts to Dismantle the U.S. Department of Education

NEA, NAACP, and a coalition of education, civil rights, and school employee groups filed a lawsuit on March 24 asking the federal district court to immediately halt the government’s attempt to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education.

The lawsuit argues that staff cuts have left the agency unable to carry out many of its statutorily-mandatory functions and put student civil rights in jeopardy.

It alleges that actions to dismantle the Department exceed the constitutional authority of the executive branch and violate the federal Administrative Procedure Act.