President Donald Trump encountered a significant setback with his education agenda when federal courts barred him from cutting off public school funding linked to diversity, equity, and inclusion programs in 2025. The courts in Maryland, New Hampshire, and Washington D.C. issued injunctions against his administration's move to withhold billions in federal funds from K-12 schools. Teachers' unions and civil rights groups brought forth legal challenges, arguing that the policy lacked clarity and violated the constitution.
The judges found the administration's lack of a clear definition of discriminatory DEI practices problematic, leading to the policy being deemed legally uncertain and arbitrary in enforcement. The blocked policy required schools to confirm they were not involved in what the administration deemed discriminatory practices related to diversity, equity, and inclusion to continue receiving federal support, particularly Title I funds assisting low-income students.
In February, the Education Department had warned schools to dismantle DEI programs or risk losing funding. Opponents of the policy expressed concerns that it could stifle discussions on race and history in classrooms and disrupt schools already grappling with resource shortages. The injunctions prevent the Education Department from implementing the policy against the plaintiffs and their associates, but the scope of the rulings is yet to be nationwide.
Despite an anticipated appeal from the administration, these decisions represent a blow to Trump's broader agenda aimed at dismantling DEI efforts across federal agencies and public institutions. Trump has faced several legal defeats since his return to office in 2025, including judicial blocks on various initiatives such as cutting funding to sanctuary cities, requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration, and freezing federal grants and foreign aid. Judges appointed by Trump himself added to the impact of the defeat on the DEI policy.
The move by the administration to bypass Congress, which holds ultimate power over education funding, has drawn criticism from legislators and legal experts who view it as an overreach of executive authority. Although the legal battle continues, the court orders remain in effect at present.