SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
higher education
Teachers Sue Trump Administration for Trying to Weaponize Civil Rights Laws
"This vague and clearly unconstitutional memo is a grave attack on students, our profession, and knowledge itself," said one union leader.
Feb 25, 2025
A coalition of educators and sociologists filed a lawsuit on Tuesday challenging the U.S. Department of Education for threatening to withhold funding from schools that don't comply with the Trump administration's radical revision of long-established federal civil rights law.
The lawsuit, filed in a Maryland federal court by the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), AFT Maryland, and the American Sociological Association (ASA), comes in response to a February 14 directive from the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights prohibiting U.S. schools at all levels from "race-based decision making, no matter the form."
This directive followed President Donald Trump's executive order calling diversity, equity, and inclusion "discriminatory" and banning DEI programs and practices across the federal government. Trump subsequently signed another orderrevoking civil rights protections for people of color and women enacted during the Lyndon B. Johnson administration and yet another targeting what he called "radical indoctrination"—which includes racial justice, LGBTQ+, and other topics—in K-12 education.
Last week, a federal judge in Maryland granted a preliminary injunction blocking portions of Trump's anti-DEI orders on grounds they "likely" violate the First Amendment.
Critics have slammed Trump's DEI ban as a rollback of hard-fought rights for historically marginalized people under false civil rights pretexts.
"This vague and clearly unconstitutional memo is a grave attack on students, our profession, and knowledge itself," AFT president Randi Weingarten said of the February 14 missive in a statement Tuesday.
Democracy Forward represents @aftunion.bsky.social, @aftmaryland.bsky.social & @asanews.bsky.social, in lawsuit challenging the Dept of Ed's new policy threatening to withhold federal funding for education institutions that do not comply with its weaponization of civil rights laws. (1/2)
[image or embed]
— Democracy Forward (@democracyforward.org) February 25, 2025 at 2:46 PM
Weingarten continued:
It would hamper efforts to extend access to education, and dash the promise of equal opportunity for all, a central tenant of the United States since its founding. It would ban meaningful instruction on slavery, the Missouri Compromise, the Emancipation Proclamation, the forced relocation of Native American tribes, the laws of Jim Crow, Brown v. Board of Education, the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, and the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. It would upend campus life. Federal statute already prohibits any president from telling schools and colleges what to teach. And students have the right to learn without the threat of culture wars waged by extremist politicians hanging over their heads. Our suit exposes these harms and shows how this memo's arbitrary and capricious reasoning flies in the face of both American values and established law.
AFT Maryland president Kenya Campbell said: "Trump's Department of Education is undermining the freedom of every student in Maryland and across the country to learn honest history, stoking more fear and division in the classroom. In a country where there should be no barriers on education, this broad-reaching and unlawful attack threatens the functionality of our public schools."
"We cannot meet the needs of every student, if we cannot teach the diverse and complex history of every student, and that is why AFT Maryland has joined this lawsuit—to ensure the honest education of all who learn in Maryland and across the country, from K-12 schools in our most vulnerable communities to our higher education institutions," Campbell added.
ASA president Adia Harvey Wingfield noted that "sociologists examine society and group behavior, including race and racial inequality."
"Studying and teaching about social movements like the civil rights movement, economic disparities caused by redlining, or immigration policies is impossible without acknowledging the central role of race in these and many other social phenomena," Wingfield argued. "This memo doesn't just hinder sociologists from doing our jobs or merely violate our right to free speech— it inflicts a profound disservice upon students who gain from a more comprehensive understanding of the world and upon society as a whole that benefits from our discoveries about human behavior."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Knowledge is Power—Why Would the Government Want to Dismantle Education?
Dismantling the Department of Education is not just a political talking point; it is an existential threat to millions of students who depend on federal protections and funding.
Feb 23, 2025
Education has long been called the great equalizer—a fundamental tool for upward mobility and societal progress. Yet, the Trump administration is advocating for the complete dismantling of the federal Department of Education, or ED, a move that would profoundly harm millions of students, especially students with disabilities, those living in poverty, and those facing discrimination.
Eliminating the ED would strip away crucial protections, defund essential programs, and exacerbate the inequalities that already plague American education. It’s not just bad policy; it’s a direct attack on the very idea that knowledge should be accessible to all.
For my family, education was never just about personal achievement—it was about survival, progress, and the ability to dream beyond one’s circumstances. My paternal grandparents grew up in a small village in Kolkata, India, in large families with limited means. My grandfather, one of 11 children, grew up in a mud house and did not own a pair of shoes until high school. Yet, thanks to India’s government-funded education system, he and my grandmother attended public schools from kindergarten through their PhDs without paying a dime. Their access to education wasn’t determined by wealth or geography—it was a right.
President Donald Trump himself has said we “have to learn from history.” So why is the administration actively working to undo the progress we’ve made?
That right changed their lives. After immigrating to the United States in 1966, my grandfather eventually became the first Indian-born president of an American university. My late grandmother, too, built a career in academia, inspiring generations of students, including me. They passed down their belief in education’s power to transform lives, a belief my mother upheld when she ensured I attended one of the best public schools available in our Midwestern state. Today, my own career is focused on ensuring that all children have access to the same life-changing opportunities that shaped my family’s story.
That’s why I am deeply alarmed at the administration’s apparent push to destroy the very institution that safeguards equitable access to education in America. The plan to abolish the ED and send all education back to the states would be calamitous. While states and localities already control most aspects of education, the ED plays an essential role in leveling the playing field. It ensures federal funding for students in low-income areas (Title I), enforces protections for students with disabilities (IDEA), and holds states accountable for upholding civil rights in schools.
Without the ED, low-income students will lose critical support. Title I funding currently supports approximately 2 in 3 public schools in the United States. Eliminating this funding would lead to devastating budget cuts, staff layoffs, and program eliminations in schools serving low-income communities. Additionally, students with disabilities will be left behind. The IDEA program currently serves about 7.5 million children aged 3 to 21, accounting for 15% of all public school students. Without ED oversight and funding, these students may not receive the specialized services they need, hindering their educational progress and future opportunities. Civil rights enforcement will also weaken. Historically, federal intervention has been necessary to combat racial segregation, gender discrimination, and unequal educational opportunities. Without ED oversight, there will be no clear mechanism to address discrimination complaints, leaving marginalized students vulnerable.
The elimination of the ED would be particularly harmful to children in government systems. Those in state foster care could lose hard-won protections that ensure they receive a consistent education in their home communities instead of being bounced from school to school and are provided with a course of study appropriate for their age and abilities. They are also far more likely to require specialized educational services—and the federal funding to pay for it. In addition, the ED plays an important role in supporting English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) programs so immigrant students attain proficiency and meet academic standards.
Finally, without the ED, higher education will become less accessible. Millions of college students depend on federal loans and Pell Grants, which are administered by the department. Without them, higher education will become an impossible dream for many. These consequences won’t just affect individual students—they will reverberate across society, deepening inequality and economic disparity for generations to come.
America’s education system is far from perfect. Teachers are underpaid and overworked, standardized testing is flawed, and school funding is wildly uneven. But abandoning federal oversight is not the solution—it’s a retreat into an era when education was a privilege reserved for certain groups and not a right.
Before the ED’s creation in 1979, education was almost entirely a state and local matter, and the disparities were staggering. Many students—particularly in the South, in rural areas, and in low-income communities—had little access to quality education. Black students faced legal segregation and underfunded schools. Girls had fewer opportunities in STEM fields and less access to higher education. Students with disabilities were often denied an education entirely. Federal actions, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, played a critical role in correcting these injustices.
President Donald Trump himself has said we “have to learn from history.” So why is the administration actively working to undo the progress we’ve made? If we allow education to be completely dictated by state governments—many of which are already erasing and rewriting history curricula—will we even be able to learn from our past at all?
Dismantling the Department of Education is not just a political talking point; it is an existential threat to millions of students who depend on federal protections and funding. If we want America to be a land of opportunity, we must fight to preserve and strengthen the institutions that make upward mobility possible. That means investing in teachers, improving curricula, and expanding access to education—not gutting the very foundation of educational equity. If you still aren’t convinced, take a walk past your local school and remember what it felt like to sit in those classrooms. Talk with a child about what topics excite them in school. Ask a grandparent how education changed their life. Then, truly consider what it would mean for these opportunities to be stripped away.
Knowledge is power; why would our own government want to take it away?
Keep ReadingShow Less
MLA Members for Palestine Protest Denial of BDS Vote at National Assembly
"We feel that it is our responsibility as the largest North American organization of scholars of literature and language to protest and stand with our colleagues who are being murdered for their existence," said one organizer.
Jan 12, 2025
"The more they try to silence us, the louder we will be!"
That was the message that protesters at the Modern Language Association Delegate Assembly in New Orleans wanted to send Saturday after the executive council of the MLA—the preeminent U.S. professional group for scholars of language and literature—blocked them from holding a member vote on a resolution endorsing the international Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement for Palestinian rights.
Like the resolution recently passed by the American Historical Association, the declaration issued by MLA Members for Justice in Palestine accuses Israel of committing scholasticide in Gaza, where—in addition to killing over 46,000 Palestinians, wounding nearly 110,000 others, and displacing around 2 million more—15 months of relentless Israeli onslaught has obliterated the embattled enclave's education infrastructure.
The MLA resolution—which supports the initial 2005 BDS call issued by Palestinian civil society groups—also acknowledges that international law experts accuse Israel of genocide and that the International Court of Justice, which is weighing a genocide case against Israel, has "determined that Israel is maintaining a system of apartheid."
"The MLA's commitment to 'justice throughout the humanities ecosystem' requires ending institutional complicity with genocide and supporting Palestinian colleagues," the statement asserts. "Therefore, be it resolved that we, the members of the MLA, endorse the 2005 BDS call."
Karim Mattar, an associate professor of English at the University of Colorado, Boulder, took part in Saturday's demonstration, during which supporters of the resolution staged a die-in and walkout, chanted slogans, and held a banner that read, "MLA Is Complicit in Genocide."
"I consider the executive council's decision to be a cowardly one," Mattar told Common Dreams. "The MLA is a humanities advocacy organization, and by repressing a membership vote, a democratic process to deliberate on the necessity of institutional divestment with companies that profit from genocide, it's actively contributing to the problem."
"I think it's a fundamental contradiction in the MLA's values between these stated values and principles of advocacy for the humanities and the blocking of a mechanism by which such advocacy might be facilitated," he added.
Mattar—who is Palestinian American and whose relatives were among the more than 750,000 Arabs who fled or were ethnically cleansed from Palestine during the Nakba, or "catastrophe" during the establishment of the modern state of Israel—said Saturday's protest brought tears to his eyes.
"To see this protest, this movement emerging at the MLA, to see this national and international movement of solidarity with Palestine to emerge in the last year, has been incredibly moving for me," he said.
Protest co-organizer Neelofer Qadir, an assistant professor of English at Georgia State University, told Common Dreams that protesters "really wanted to draw attention to how institutions are being destroyed, like universities, like libraries, like archives, which makes certain that there is a deep commitment to genocide and why scholasticide is part of genocide because the Israeli government intends to destroy all possible evidence of Palestinian life, past, present, and therefore no longer in the future."
"And we feel that it is our responsibility as the largest North American organization of scholars of literature and language to protest and stand with our colleagues who are being murdered for their existence," she added.
Last month, the MLA executive council
explained that while it is "appalled by the continued attack on Gaza," it believed that "supporting a BDS resolution was not a possible way forward for the association to address the crisis" due to "legal and fiduciary reasons."
Qadir dismissed the council's excuse, saying she believes the MLA is "engaged in a formal program of organized abandonment that is part and parcel of fascist and neoliberal governance that's happening in the U.S., Canada, and across the world."
St. John's University associate English professor Raj Chetty, who also organized Saturday's action, told Common Dreams that "whatever the MLA has said about the 'fiduciary concerns' about this, we're like, you're going to find out some other fiduciary concerns as you notice that both intellectual work and membership dues are going to start evaporating."
As part of their effort, MLA Members for Justice in Palestine are urging supporters to not renew their MLA membership "until there's a meaningful substantial change in position," as Chetty put it.
"This [protest] is a real call to humanity, a real call to justice, a real call against complicity, and a real call to support Palestinian life and rail against Israeli actions that are ending Palestinian life in all the ways that Neelofer talked about," he said.
Disclosure note: Olivia Rosane reported from the MLA conference, which she attended as a member, and has signed the pledge not to renew membership.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular