Somersworth School Board votes to join lawsuit challenging US Education Department guidance

The Somersworth School Board voted 4–1 on April 8 to join litigation challenging a U.S. Department of Education guidance that legal counsel at the ACLU of New Hampshire and other plaintiffs say threatens federal funding and is legally vague.

The board’s decision follows a presentation by Gilles Bissonnette, legal director for the ACLU of New Hampshire, who said the February 14 “Dear Colleague” letter and a later certification demand interpret Title VI in ways that could be read to ban or curtail diversity, equity and inclusion programming. Bissonnette told the board the letter is “vague and ambiguous” and that the ACLU is seeking to block the immediate certification requirement with a temporary restraining order; that hearing was scheduled the day after the meeting.

Bissonnette said the suit argues the guidance likely violates the First Amendment, the Fifth Amendment’s due-process protections and the Administrative Procedure Act because it was not subject to formal rulemaking and does not give clear standards districts can follow. He said the ACLU is representing participating districts at no cost and described a developing coalition of districts planning to join the litigation.

Board Chair Maggie Larson moved to join as a plaintiff; the motion passed on roll call: Maggie Larson, yes; Carrie Clark, yes; Sarah O’Brien Hart, yes; Crystal d Saint Croix, no; Carly Prescott, yes. The board’s motion directs district counsel to execute a retention/representation agreement with the ACLU and to participate as a plaintiff in NEA v. United States Department of Education in U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire.

Superintendent remarks and later discussion stressed the timing pressure created by state and federal certification deadlines and the immediate consequences districts face if they cannot say with certainty that their programs comply. Bissonnette urged the board that joining would let the district seek injunctive relief and part of a broader coalition arguing for clearer federal standards.

The board discussion included concerns about potential retaliation and funding risks. Bissonnette said the ACLU would represent participating districts vigorously and that the intent of the suit is to preserve schools’ ability to provide inclusive educational services while clarifying legal obligations.

The board did not adopt a public resolution text at the meeting beyond the vote to join; the ACLU said the next steps would include preparing a short declaration from the superintendent describing how the guidance has affected district operations and finalizing the retention agreement.