Politics
NEW: Supreme Court Sides With Trump Admin In DEI-Related Case
The Supreme Court on Friday allowed the Trump Administration to terminate Education Department grants for teacher training programs that violated the administration’s policy outlawing diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives at the federal level.
The 5-4 decision vacates a lower court ruling made by a Massachusetts-based federal judge, that said the administration had failed to follow the correct legal process in terminating the grants. Roughly $65 million in grant payments remain outstanding.
Five of the court’s conservative members formed the majority opinion, while Chief Justice John Roberts joined all three liberals in dissent.
Friday’s decision found that the district court judge did not have authority to order that the funds be paid under a federal law called the Administrative Procedure Act. The court found that the administration “compellingly argues” that the entities due to receive the funds would not suffer “irreparable harm” as a result of the funds being withheld, justices conduced.
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Elena Kagan disagreed with the conclusion, stating that the entities in question will be forced to cancel some of their programs without the funding. “Nowhere in its papers does the government defend the legality of canceling the education grants at issue here,” she added.
At issue in the case are two grant programs intended to address a nationwide shortage of teachers. The Department of Education canceled all but five of the 109 grants after reviews found “objectionable” DEI themes in the trainings. In one example of the taxpayer-funded trainings, teachers were told that young infants and toddlers can already be classified as racists.
Eight states, led by California, filed a lawsuit in federal court in Massachusetts in early March. They contended that universities and nonprofits in their states had received grants through the programs, and that the Department of Education had violated the federal law governing administrative agencies when it ended those grants, according to a case summary from SCOTUS Blog.
A federal district judge then issued a temporary restraining order that ordered the administration to reinstate the grants in states that had joined with the lawsuit. U.S. District Judge Myong Joun also prohibited the government from implementing other terminations in those states.
A federal appeals court declined to issue a hold on the order pending the administration’s appeal, though it did fast-track the appeal itself.
“The government is likely to show, the majority continued, that Joun lacked the power to order the government to make the payments under the federal law governing administrative agencies. Although that law waives the federal government’s general immunity from lawsuits, the majority explained, the waiver is a limited one that does not apply to court orders that would require the government to pay money for a contractual obligation,” SCOTUS Blog reported.
The majority ultimately concluded that The Tucker Act, gives another court, the Court of Federal Claims, the power to hear lawsuits arising from contracts with the United States.
“Today marks a significant victory for President Trump and the rule of law,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said in response to the ruling.
“This Supreme Court ruling vindicates what the Department of Justice has been arguing for months: local district judges do not have the jurisdiction to seize control of taxpayer dollars, force the government to pay out billions, or unilaterally halt President Trump’s policy agenda. Department of Justice attorneys will continue fighting to protect the executive branch from gross judicial overreach.”
