US Supreme Court lets Trump cut teacher training grants in DEI-related case

The court’s brief and unsigned opinion put on hold a lower court order by US District Judge Myong Joun that required the Department of Education to reinstate $600 million in funding while litigation proceeds. The lawsuit was filed by eight Democrat-led states, including California, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Wisconsin, which sued after the Department of Education announced it would eliminate teacher training grants that were promoting “divisive ideologies” like DEI.

The majority opinion stated the Trump administration is "likely to succeed in showing the district court lacked jurisdiction to order the payment of money.” The court also noted that the states suing “have the financial wherewithal to keep their programs running. So, if respondents ultimately prevail, they can recover any wrongfully withheld funds through suit in an appropriate forum.”

Judge Joun had initially ruled that the administration likely violated the Administrative Procedure Act by terminating congressionally authorized grants without giving individualized justifications for each program. According to a report by Reuters, grant recipients were notified in writing that the Department of Education does not support DEI programs "or any other initiatives that unlawfully discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or another protected characteristic."

This marks the second time the Supreme Court has weighed in on an emergency request involving the Trump administration’s federal spending reductions. Last month, the court voted 5-4 to reject the administration’s request to freeze $2 billion in foreign aid payments. The ruling also comes as the administration has criticized judicial overreach by lower courts that have blocked several of its policy initiatives.

In addition to the spending cuts, the Trump administration has taken steps toward dismantling the Department of Education entirely, though it acknowledged such a move would require an act of Congress.