On April 24, 2025, federal courts in New Hampshire, Maryland, and the District of Columbia weighed in on three separate challenges brought against the U.S. Department of Education’s February 14, 2025 Dear Colleague Letter (“DCL”), the March 1, 2025 Frequently Asked Questions (“FAQs”), and the April 24, 2025 Certification Requirement for states and public school districts (the “Certification”).

Hunton previously discussed the key takeaways from the DCL and the FAQs for institutions of higher education in our March 27, 2025 client alert, available here.

In three different challenges heard by three different federal courts, the courts overall found in favor of the organizational plaintiffs based on Fifth Amendment vagueness claims, First Amendment claims, and Administrative Procedure Act claims. The result is that the U.S. Department of Education’s enforcement of compliance with Title VI based on the DCL, FAQs, and the Certification is currently halted across the United States.

The individual cases are summarized as follows:

• In National Education Association v. U.S. Department of Education (D.N.H.) (1:25-cv-00091-LM), the named plaintiffs included the National Education Association (NEA) and NEA’s affiliate in New Hampshire (NEA-NH) and the Center for Black Educator. In this case, the Court granted a preliminary injunction halting enforcement of the DCL – but not a nationwide injunction. Rather, the preliminary injunction applies to the named plaintiffs and “entities receiving federal funding that employee or contract with plaintiffs or plaintiffs’ members.” The NEA, according to its website has more than 3 million members, in school districts across the country,
• In American Federation of Teachers v. U.S. Department of Education (D. Md.) (Case No. 1:25-cv-00628-SAG), the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and AFT’s affiliate in Maryland (AFT-MD), the American Sociological Association, and Eugene School District 4J brought suit against the U.S. Department of Education. In this case, Court stayed the enforcement of the DCL pending further court resolution, but did not enjoin the FAQs. The court explained that the U.S. Department of Education can only pursue Title VI enforcement actions “consistent with long-standing principles and the dictates of SFFA” (referring to the Supreme Court’s decision prohibiting considerations of race in college admissions in Supreme Court v. Harvard, 600 U.S. 181 (2023)). The Court further explained that assuming the Certification is considered “an implementation of the [Dear Colleague] Letter, it would of course be improper for the government to initiate enforcement based on a stayed policy, through [this] certification or otherwise.” The Court was clear that these remedies were not limited to just the parties in this case, but apply nationwide.
• In NAACP v. U.S. Department of Education (D.D.C.) (Case No. 1:25-cv-01120), the Court enjoined the U.S. Department of Education from implementing and enforcing the Certification on a nationwide basis. Specifically, the Court prohibited the U.S. Department of Education from:
  • “requir[ing] any entity or individual subject to the Certification to make any ‘certification’ or other representation or assurance pursuant to the Certification.”
  • “impos[ing] any consequences on any entity or individual subject to the Certification for failing to submit a Certification.”
  • “initiat[ing] any enforcement action, including, but not limited to, a False Claims Act suit, against any entity or individual which has already submitted a Certification, arising out of any representation made or assurance given by such entity or individual in complying with the Certification.”

The combined effect of these three decisions limits – at least for now – U.S. Department of Education’s ability to enforce any reading of Title VI and its implementing regulations beyond established law. This includes enforcement related to DEI programs and initiatives.

However, as of April 28, 2025, all of these enjoined or stayed documents remain on OCR’s Policy Guidance webpage, available here.

These cases illustrate the tension between the executive branch’s interpretation and enforcement of Title VI and other federal civil rights laws, and the ever-changing requirements imposed on higher education and K-12 public schools. Institutions with questions about civil rights enforcement or the impact of court decisions on the K-12 certification requirement should reach out to their Hunton lawyer.