Trump administration asks Supreme Court to intervene in case over canceled DEI-related grants
The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to intervene in a dispute over Department of Education grants that were canceled due to funding programs promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. The Justice Department requested the justices to put on hold a temporary order from a lower court requiring the Education Department to restore millions of dollars in grants for recipients in eight states that challenged the cancellations.
A federal appeals court declined to provide relief to the Justice Department and agreed with the district court that the terminations of the grants likely violated a federal law governing the agency rulemaking process. Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris raised concerns about the scope of the lower court’s order, echoing the administration’s recent focus on nationwide injunctions issued by district courts.
The grant programs in question, the Teacher Quality Partnership program and the Supporting Effective Educator Development program, aim to improve the development and quality of teachers. The acting education secretary ordered a review of all grant awards to ensure they did not fund discriminatory DEI practices. The review led to the termination of 104 grants that conflicted with the department’s policy objectives.
After the grants were canceled, eight states filed a lawsuit seeking a temporary restraining order from a federal district judge in Massachusetts. The states argued that the grant cancellations violated the Administrative Procedure Act, as the Education Department failed to provide a transparent and reasonable explanation for terminating the grants.
The district court in Massachusetts issued a temporary restraining order, requiring the Trump administration to reinstate the grants for recipients in the states and block any further cancellations. The 1st Circuit rejected the Education Department’s request to pause the order, leading to an extension of the temporary order while the court considered longer-term relief.
The Trump administration also faces challenges in Maryland over scrapped DEI-related grants. The government warned of overlapping orders from courts in Maryland and Massachusetts, reiterating its opposition to broad injunctions issued by district courts. The administration argued that the temporary restraining order interferes with the operations of the Executive Branch and exceeds judicial jurisdiction.
On the merits of the case, the acting solicitor general argued that the Massachusetts court lacked jurisdiction to consider the states’ claims, suggesting the case should be heard by the U.S. Court of Federal Claims as a contract dispute. The administration seeks relief from the Supreme Court to address the issue of district courts exceeding their jurisdiction with broad injunctions.
In conclusion, the Trump administration’s request for the Supreme Court to intervene in the dispute over canceled education grants reflects ongoing legal battles over DEI initiatives and the scope of judicial injunctions. The outcome of these cases could have significant implications for federal agency rulemaking and funding decisions related to diversity and inclusion programs.
