The Trump administration wants the nation’s schools to certify that they’re not using “illegal DEI practices” by April 24 in order to continue receiving federal education funds.
In a letter sent April 3, the administration gave state education chiefs 10 days to sign a certification saying they’re complying with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits race-based discrimination in federally funded programs.
But the certification makes clear that the U.S. Department of Education considers the use of diversity, equity, and inclusion—which it doesn’t specifically define—to be a potential violation of the anti-discrimination law. It argues that the act of treating people differently based on their race, or programs that “advantage one’s race over another,” constitute an “illegal DEI practice,” citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision to overturn the legality of affirmative action policies that allowed universities to consider race as a factor in college admissions decisions.
The department initially gave states 10 days to respond, but extended the deadline to April 24 in a follow-up letter. The agency is also asking state education chiefs to collect certifications from local districts.
State leaders are starting to share whether they intend to comply with the certification order, and early reactions are breaking down largely—but not entirely—along party lines.
As of April 18, 16 states and Puerto Rico have said they intend to sign the certification, according to an Education Week tally. Sixteen states have declined to sign the certification. The remaining states either are still reviewing the certification and haven’t indicated their intentions or haven’t yet made public comments on the matter.
The 16 states that intend to sign the certification break down the following way in terms of partisan control: In 11 states, Republicans control the executive and legislative branches; in four states, Republicans and Democrats split control of the two branches; and in one state, Democrats control both branches.
One of those states, New Hampshire, set up a website posting local districts’ certifications as they come in, earning praise from Education Secretary Linda McMahon. A handful of New Hampshire school districts, meanwhile, are joining one of the legal challenges to the certification requirement.
In another state, Kentucky, Education Commissioner Robbie Fletcher signed the certification while acknowledging in an email to superintendents that the Education Department order was “not without issues.
“Nevertheless, I am confident that through our statewide commitment to providing opportunity and access for every student, we can advance towards meeting the needs and ensuring the success of each student in Kentucky’s public schools,” he wrote.
The state gave districts until April 18 to sign their own certifications, but said it will propose that the federal office for civil rights take no enforcement action against districts that don’t sign “on the grounds that the Certification Form does not comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,” Fletcher wrote to superintendents, according to the Lexington Herald-Leader.
Some states are balking at the DEI certification order
Meanwhile, 14 states that have said they don’t intend to comply have Democratic governors while two, Utah and Vermont, have Republican governors.
Some of those declining to sign the federal certification have questioned the Education Department’s authority to request such a certification and noted that districts already routinely certify their compliance with civil rights laws as a condition of receiving federal money.
“We will not sign additional certifications that lack authority, lack clarity, or are an assault on the autonomy of states and local school districts by misapplying a higher education admissions case,” said Chris Reykdal, Washington state’s education chief, in an April 8 statement. “It would be irresponsible to do so.”
Some states that didn’t sign the certification asked the department to reply with more details about whether the request amounts to a threat of enforcement of requirements beyond existing law; which federal grant programs would be in jeopardy if the department finds states in violation; and which law authorizes the department to compel states to insist that districts sign federal certifications.
Some also raised concerns about the abrupt nature of the department’s request, which came with no comment period or advance notice.
“At best, the Reminder and Request appears to be redundant,” wrote Benjamin Jones, general counsel for the Wisconsin Department of Instruction. “At worst, the Reminder and Request appears to be unauthorized, unlawful, and unconstitutionally vague.”
A spokesperson for the Utah state board of education told news station KJZZ the state will develop its own response outlining state laws and rules that hold districts “accountable for anti-discrimination.” The state, for example, has a DEI ban that took effect last year barring practices such as diversity trainings, equity audits, and DEI offices at schools and colleges.
“By taking this approach, we are neither rejecting or signing the certification, but showing that we are, indeed, in compliance with federal and civil rights laws,” Utah State Board of Education spokesperson Ryan Bartlett told the news station.
In Vermont, Education Secretary Zoie Saunders on April 14 sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Education certifying the state’s compliance with Title VI while pushing back against the federal request to certify that schools are not using “illegal DEI practices” and other provisions. The Green Mountain State’s certification “does not incorporate any other Executive Orders, memoranda, or guidance materials or the undefined language regarding ‘certain DEI practices’ or ‘illegal DEI’ in the Request for Certification,” Saunders wrote.
“Indeed, the Department’s own guidance affirms that ‘DEI’ practices are lawful,” the letter continued. "... And schools may employ staff whose titles include ‘DEI Coordinator’ because schools have important obligations, including Title VI obligations, to foster welcoming and equitable learning opportunities for students of all races, and to respond to allegations of racial harassment.”
Education Week previously categorized Vermont as a state that intended to sign the Education Department’s certification based on earlier communications from that state’s education department.
Some states, including Louisiana, are soliciting signatures from districts but haven’t said whether the state itself will sign. Others, including Missouri, have told districts they don’t need to sign the letter because they’ve previously certified that they’re complying with federal laws.
Trump’s anti-DEI push has drawn legal challenges
The certification order for states and school districts stems from a Feb. 14 Dear Colleague letter issued by the Education Department and a subsequent “frequently asked questions” document that warned districts they’d risk losing federal funds if they retained DEI programming.
The department also launched an “End DEI” portal to solicit public complaints about DEI programs in schools.
The nation’s two largest teachers’ unions separately sued the department over those measures, and they have both since added challenges to the certification letter to their lawsuits. Both are seeking judges to stop the federal agency from enforcing the February memo and the certification requirement. The NAACP launched a third legal challenge to the Dear Colleague letter and certification requirement on April 15.
On April 10, the department agreed as part of the National Education Association’s lawsuit in federal court in New Hampshire to halt any enforcement of either the February Dear Colleague letter or the latest certification requirement until after April 24.
“This pause in enforcement provides immediate relief to schools across the country while the broader legal challenge continues,” the NEA press release announcing the agreement said.
The U.S. Department of Labor under Trump has also drawn legal challenges for an executive order requiring grant recipients to sign a certification letter similar to the one sent to states and K-12 schools.
In blocking part of that order, a judge said plaintiffs who challenged it were likely to succeed in arguing that the order is unconstitutionally vague and violates free speech rights.
The Trump administration “has studiously declined to shed any light on what [DEI] means,” wrote Judge Matthew Kennelly of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. “The answer is anything but obvious.”
