The Trump administration has requested the Supreme Court’s permission to terminate teacher preparation grants that the Education Department argues promote diversity, equity, and inclusion. In an urgent plea, the administration argued against funding these programs with millions of dollars while eight Democratic-led states are contesting the decision to discontinue them. Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris characterized the situation as part of a series of recent legal actions in which a single District Court judge wields unchecked power in blocking administration policies that could save taxpayers significant sums. She identified the case as a prime example of the need to prevent excessive interference from District Court judges. Harris emphasized the importance of prompt appellate review to address ongoing fiscal micromanagement by district courts. The federal judge overseeing the conflict in Boston had instructed the Education Department to temporarily reinstate the grants to the affected states earlier in the month. However, the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the administration’s bid to halt this decision. Appeals Judge William Kayatta, writing on behalf of the three judges, all appointed by Democratic presidents, criticized the department for lacking a reasoned explanation in its termination letters to grant recipients. Kayatta warned that cutting the funding could lead to staff layoffs and disruptions to programs. California Attorney General Rob Bonta, leading a coalition of eight Democratic states attorneys general challenging the cuts, highlighted California’s potential loss of at least $148 million for programs that support teacher training in critical areas such as math and science, and in schools facing high poverty or high needs. The Education Department defended its decision to cancel grants aimed at training teachers and education agencies on what it termed “divisive ideologies,” including DEI, critical race theory, and anti-racism.”
