As Brooke Schultz reports in Education Week, the administration had demanded that states sign a letter pledging schools would eliminate DEI or risk losing federal funds. Gallagher struck this down as unlawful, pointing out that the Department not only bypassed proper rulemaking procedures but also overstepped its authority by trying to dictate curriculum—something federal law prohibits (Schultz, 2025). For educators and unions that have resisted what they describe as a “war on education,” the ruling is a clear victory.
But in Texas, the fight is far from over. Senate Bill 12 (SB 12), passed earlier this year and set to take effect on September 1, 2025, bans DEI outright in K-12 schools. The law prohibits schools from considering race, ethnicity, gender identity, or sexual orientation in hiring, instruction, or programming. It even requires parental permission for student clubs, sets up grievance systems for parents to file complaints, and authorizes disciplinary action against teachers who engage in DEI work (Texas Legislature Online, 2025; Texas Tribune, 2025).
Civil rights groups such as the ACLU of Texas and Students Engaged in Advancing Texas (SEAT) warn that SB 12 represents an assault on student rights and inclusive education. They have already announced plans to challenge the law in court, arguing that it strips away support systems for LGBTQIA+, Black, and Brown students while creating a climate of fear for educators (ACLU of Texas, 2025).
The contradiction is stark: at the federal level, a Trump-appointed judge ruled that anti-DEI mandates violated the Constitution. Yet in Texas, state leaders are charging ahead with some of the harshest restrictions on DEI in the country. These dueling developments remind us that the battle for inclusive, equitable public schools will be fought both in the courts and in our communities.
As educators, parents, and advocates, we must remain vigilant. The federal ruling is a sign that justice and constitutional protections can prevail, but Texas’s SB 12 shows just how quickly rights can be rolled back when fear and ideology drive policy. The fight for schools that affirm all students—regardless of race, gender, or identity—has never been more urgent.
Now is the time to act. Support organizations like the ACLU of Texas and SEAT that are preparing legal challenges, attend local school board meetings to resist the chilling effects of SB 12, and amplify the stories of students and teachers most impacted. Our collective voice is the strongest defense against censorship, erasure, and the dismantling of inclusive education.
With our students and Gen Z Texans in mind, we desperately need you to get out and vote, too, so that we can build a better and brighter Texas.
Check out my "power-of-3.5 percent" blog I posted yesterday.
We can totally do this. Sí se puede! Yes we can!
-Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.
References
ACLU of Texas. (2025, May 24). ACLU of Texas comments on passage of SB 12, a bill that bans diversity, equity, and inclusion in K–12. https://www.aclutx.org/en/press-releases/aclu-texas-comments-passage-sb-12-bill-bans-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-k-12
American Civil Liberties Union of Texas. (2025, June 23). ACLU of Texas, SEAT will sue over S.B. 12 — Texas law that prohibits programs and discussions involving race, gender identity, and sexual orientation in K‑12 schools [Press release]. ACLU of Texas. https://www.aclutx.org/en/press-releases/aclu-texas-seat-will-sue-over-sb-12-texas-law-prohibits-programs-and-discussions
Schultz, B. (2025, August 15). Ed. Dept.’s anti-DEI efforts leapfrog procedure and run headfirst into serious constitutional problems, judge rules. Education Week. https://www.edweek.org
Texas Legislature Online. (2025). Senate Bill 12 analysis, 89th Legislature. https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/89R/analysis/pdf/SB00012F.pdf
Texas Tribune. (2025, May 24). Texas law bans DEI in K–12 schools, limits discussion of gender and sexuality. https://www.texastribune.org/2025/05/24/texas-dei-ban-schools-senate-bill-12
Brooke Schultz, EdWeek | August 15, 2025
The Trump administration ran “into serious constitutional problems” by asking states to certify their school districts don’t use diversity, equity, and inclusion practices, a federal judge ruled this week.
Maryland District Judge Stephanie Gallagher on Thursday sided with a coalition of plaintiffs—including the American Federation of Teachers, the nation’s second-largest teachers’ union, and the Eugene, Ore., school district—that sued in an effort to strike down several efforts made by the U.S. Department of Education to curb educators’ use of what it called “illegal DEI practices” without defining the term.
The plaintiffs were challenging a Feb. 14 department memo, sent to K-12 schools and universities, telling them to cease using “race as a factor in admissions, financial aid, hiring, training, and other institutional programming,” and a certification requirement, through which the Education Department threatened to withhold federal funding unless states signed a letter saying no schools used DEI.
Gallagher, along with other federal judges considering similar cases, had already agreed with plaintiffs that the Feb. 14 “Dear Colleague” letter ran afoul of the law, but her 76-page order Thursday fully considered the certification requirement. A Trump-appointed judge, Gallagher found it unlawful.
“This court takes no view as to whether the policies at issue in this case are good or bad, prudent or foolish, fair or unfair. But, at this stage too, it must closely scrutinize whether the government went about creating and implementing them in the manner the law requires. Here, it did not,” she wrote in her opinion. “And by leapfrogging important procedural requirements, the government has unwittingly run headfirst into serious constitutional problems.”
The ruling is a victory for the educators who have repeatedly challenged President Donald Trump’s administration for its swift and aggressive action to carry out the president’s policy agenda. Since taking office, the Trump administration has zeroed in on what it calls “illegal DEI”—issuing executive orders and launching other policy efforts to curb its use.
Plaintiffs called Gallagher’s opinion an “invaluable decision that will have a sweeping and positive impact on public schools, teachers, and students.”
“Threatening teachers and sowing chaos in schools throughout America is part of the Trump-Vance administration’s war on education, and today the people won,” the coalition, represented by the group Democracy Forward, said in a statement. “While the fight to protect public education is far from over, today’s ruling is an important victory.”
An Education Department spokesperson said, despite the ruling, the agency “remains committed to its responsibility to uphold students’ anti-discrimination protections under the law.”
“While the department is disappointed in the judge’s ruling, judicial action enjoining or setting aside this guidance has not stopped our ability to enforce Title VI protections for students at an unprecedented level,” the spokesperson continued.
Judge says administration can’t express viewpoints at ‘expense of constitutional rights’
Early into his second term, Trump signed an executive order threatening federal funds if schools used DEI, which he termed “discriminatory equity ideology.” The Education Department began working in tandem by issuing anti-DEI memos, opening an “End DEI” portal for the public to report the use of DEI, and directing states and school districts to certify they wouldn’t use DEI in order to receive federal funds. The department has also opened at least 65 civil rights investigations into school districts and colleges over alleged use of DEI, alleging violations of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act for initiatives such as a Black Student Success Plan in Chicago.
Twenty-one states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico had said they would sign the certification, according to an Education Week tally. Twenty-five states declined to sign it. The Education Department set an April 24 deadline.
The actions sparked several lawsuits, and three judges in April agreed with plaintiffs that they didn’t pass legal muster, putting them on hold for slightly different reasons.
Gallagher, appointed to the federal bench in Trump’s first term, found in April that the administration hadn’t followed proper procedure in directing schools to eliminate DEI programs, which she said represented a significant policy change. She also found that the directive overstepped the federal government’s authority with respect to curriculum, which it’s prohibited by law from influencing or prescribing.
Her April ruling temporarily blocked the Feb. 14 “Dear Colleague” letter on DEI. Her Thursday ruling was the final finding in the case.
In the Thursday decision, Gallagher said the letter and certification requirement “both make credible and specific threats of enforcement relating to classroom speech.” She also found that the administration did not properly follow rulemaking procedures.
“The administration is entitled to express its viewpoints and to promulgate policies aligned with those viewpoints,” she wrote. “But it must do so within the procedural bounds Congress has outlined. And it may not do so at the expense of constitutional rights.”
American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten called Gallagher’s decision a “huge win” and “sweeping indictment” of the Trump administration’s actions.
“This decision rightly strikes down the government’s attempt to dictate curriculum, and, in so doing, upholds the purpose and promise inherent in our public schools,” she said in a statement.
