Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Vermont have joined a coalition of 19 states in suing the Trump administration over the president’s nationwide directive to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs in public schools. The move puts over $13.8 billion in federal funding at risk, according to the lawsuit. Multiple federal judges blocked or delayed the administration’s directive shortly after it was issued, and enforcement is on hold while the lawsuit proceeds.

Trump’s broad directive called for states to certify public schools’ compliance with Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, a 2023 Supreme Court ruling, and Title VI of the U.S. Civil Rights Act, which bars racial discrimination in programs or activities that receive federal funding. The states must also eliminate all “illegal DEI practices” in public schools or risk losing federal funding, including access to Title I, the largest source of federal revenue for K-12 public education that provides vital support for low-income students.

In the federal lawsuit filed on April 25 in Massachusetts, the states’ attorneys general argued that Trump’s threat to withhold funding is illegal and “unconstitutionally coercive” and that the states are already in compliance with the civil rights laws. The lawsuit also added that the interpretation of civil rights law is “vague, confusing, and incorrect.” 

“Plaintiffs are left with an impossible choice: either certify compliance with an ambiguous and unconstitutional federal directive—threatening to chill policies, programs, and speech—or risk losing indispensable funds that serve their most vulnerable student populations,” the lawsuit states.

New England teachers speak out

States in New England are responding to the anti-DEI directive in several ways. For example, some states like Vermont submitted a single, statewide certification of compliance for all districts, while others like New Hampshire require individual district certifications and are publicly tracking compliance. 

While many educators in New England have been able to navigate the complex landscape set by federal restrictions and state mandates because of their state’s dedication to DEI protection, they still worry about the future. 

In Massachusetts, Gov. Maura Healey and Attorney General Andrea Campbell created joint guidance for public schools and colleges, reaffirming DEI efforts in education and pushing back against the federal government’s guidance. The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education also affirmed to the Trump administration that it would continue to adhere to DEI in schools, CBS News reported.

Macy Moon, a fifth-grade English Language Arts (ELA) and social studies teacher at a school in Fall River, Massachusetts, with a majority of immigrant and low-income students, told Prism that her school has two classroom settings: foundational and transitional English classes for immigrant students. With threats to DEI, she worries that these classrooms could be eliminated, posing a disadvantage to the students at her school. 

“I could see, depending on how [ELA] classrooms are perceived by the administration, maybe they could be completely taken out,” she said, adding that the same could be true for other classrooms such as for special education. “I don’t know where that would leave mainstream teachers like me, who already really struggle to differentiate instruction for a kid who is reading at a fifth-grade level in fifth grade and a kid who still doesn’t know how to read.”

The Department of Education now has an “End DEI” portal to collect public complaints about DEI programs, adding to the climate of scrutiny and confusion. Between the legal threats and vagueness of the anti-DEI directive, educators are unsure what classroom practices might be targeted, creating the possibility of self-censorship or avoidance of inclusive programming out of caution. 

Trump’s directive would lead to major federal funding cuts to public schools, with the federal government providing about 10% of K-12 funding across the country, the New York Times reported. In Massachusetts, about $100 million of K-12 federal funding is at stake.

Jenaea Duddie, a substitute teacher at a high school in Colchester, Connecticut, said she’s passionate about DEI and grateful that the state administration is pushing back against Trump’s efforts. Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont also refused to comply with Trump’s directive or sign the compliance outlined in the letter, stating that Connecticut is already in compliance with federal anti-discrimination laws, the CT Mirror reported. 

Duddie said balancing federal and state guidelines has been a challenge, but her boss has given her the flexibility to incorporate a diversity lens in her teachings. While she’s heard that some parents in her town have been vocally against DEI, she said that teachers at her school support it overall.

“I’ve been grateful to not have run into any problems, like where I am and what I’m teaching,” she said. “Inside the actual high school, I haven’t received any repercussions. I’m also just kind of cautious of who to share my true, honest opinions with, because I know some people are more open to having that conversation, and some people where it’s like, ‘OK, maybe I just shouldn’t engage in a conversation like this at all.’”

While DEI has been protected by lawmakers in Connecticut and Massachusetts—both involved in the lawsuit—DEI in many New Hampshire public schools is safe because of recent legal wins led by civil rights and education organizations. 

In February, New Hampshire filed a lawsuit against the Department of Education’s Dear Colleague letter, which imposed vague restrictions on DEI curriculum. Last month, a preliminary injunction was issued, preventing the letter’s restrictions from being enforced while litigation continues.

“We are not going to accept—whether it’s the state level or the federal level—any anti-public education politicians when they come out and threaten to punish students or parents or educators in public schools for fostering those inclusive classrooms where we do value diversity, where we’re teaching history honestly, and that every child has that chance to build that bright future,” National Education Association–New Hampshire President Megan Tuttle told Prism.

Clare McIntyre, an elementary school music educator in Rochester, New Hampshire, told Prism that despite her town being largely conservative, her district’s mandates are more equitable than what the state wants, noting that public opinion is influential in swaying school districts in the area. The superintendent of her school district has shown a strong commitment to DEI, she said, which has allowed her to continue incorporating DEI into her teaching.

“At the elementary level, we haven’t really received much guidance as far as teaching DEI, but I try to incorporate that in my lessons, and so far, I haven’t run into any issues,” McIntyre said.

“I try to center my lessons around culture and my students’ identities, and also identities they might not have a lot of contact with,” she said, adding that she focused her recent lesson plans on Black music, as well as dance and music styles among Pacific Islanders and the struggles they’ve faced.

New Hampshire’s rollout for this year’s curriculum has not changed since the directive didn’t come out until earlier this year, Tuttle said. But educators she has spoken to are worried about next year’s rollout, especially with an amendment to an advancing legislation that would prohibit DEI in the state budget. 

“In some of the more rural parts of New Hampshire, I could see DEI going right out the window, if that’s what school boards and parents want,” McIntyre said. “Depending on how people are feeling about the political climate, I think that’s what’s going to determine how school districts respond to it.”

Editorial Team:
Carolyn Copeland, Lead Editor
Lara Witt, Top Editor
Rashmee Kumar, Copy Editor