DOJ joins lawsuit against LA Public Schools alleging discrimination against white students

On Wednesday, in announcing their joining of the lawsuit filed by the 1776 Project Foundation, federal officials framed the case as an equal-protection dispute. Attorney General Pamela Bondi said equal treatment is a constitutional requirement, not an optional policy choice, and emphasized that the department intends to enforce that principle for Los Angeles public school students. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon, who leads the Civil Rights Division, argued that LAUSD’s approach improperly sorts students by race and treats some as if they need special accommodations because of the racial makeup of their school communities. First Assistant US Attorney Bill Essayli called the program outdated and said it has persisted so long that it has become unconstitutional.

According to the federal complaint, PHBAO is built on a simple dividing line: LAUSD groups residents into “Anglo” and “HBAO,” a combined category that includes Hispanic, Black, Asian, and “Other Non-Anglo.” Schools are then classified as PHBAO or non-PHBAO depending on the racial composition of the resident student population. A school receives PHBAO status when more than 70 percent of its resident students fall into LAUSD’s HBAO category, in other words, when the neighborhood is majority non-white under LAUSD’s definitions.

The Justice Department argued that the program began decades ago as a response to patterns of black–white segregation identified in the 1960s, but that LAUSD’s demographics have changed dramatically since then. Federal lawyers said white students make up such a small portion of LAUSD that the PHBAO designation covers the vast majority of schools, making the district’s “special” status system both incoherent and, in the government’s view, unconstitutional.

The federal filings highlight several concrete advantages that LAUSD allegedly attaches to PHBAO classification, including extra funding and smaller class sizes, more parent-teacher conferences, and a boost in magnet admissions. The Justice Department also points to LAUSD statements indicating that magnet admissions decisions are tied to the “need to maintain a racially balanced enrollment.” According to the federal government, LAUSD is effectively treating residence in a non-white neighborhood as a disadvantage comparable to overcrowding, something the complaint argues is an impermissible racial stereotype and an unlawful basis for distributing educational benefits.

The Justice Department’s intervention centers on the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The government argues that once a state provides public education, it must offer educational opportunities on equal terms. It also argues that a key equal-protection injury occurs when students are forced to compete in a system that allocates benefits and burdens on the basis of race.

The federal complaint seeks a court declaration that LAUSD’s PHBAO program violates equal protection, and it asks for a permanent injunction blocking the district from using race-, color-, or national-origin-based preferences in operating, funding, advertising, or admitting students into school programs.

The Justice Department is moving to intervene under federal rules and a Civil Rights Act provision that allows the Attorney General to join certain equal-protection cases after certifying they are of “general public importance.” The department argues its intervention is timely and appropriate because the case is still in early stages and because the outcome could affect not only the plaintiffs but the broader LAUSD student population.

If the court grants the motion, the federal government would become an active party in the litigation, pressing its own constitutional challenge to LAUSD’s PHBAO system and seeking court-ordered changes to how LAUSD allocates resources and manages access to magnet programs.