Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Solicitor says federal injunction pauses Education Department enforcement of DEI guidance; district covered by order
Summary
District solicitor reported that a federal court in New Hampshire enjoined the U.S. Department of Education from enforcing recent executive orders and guidance about diversity, equity and inclusion; the injunction covers districts with NEA-affiliated local associations, which includes Spring-Ford.
Get email alerts on the Education Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
SPRINGFORD, Pa. — The Spring-Ford Area School District’s solicitor told the board April 28 that a federal court in New Hampshire has enjoined the U.S. Department of Education from implementing or enforcing recent executive orders and guidance concerning diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) and Title VI obligations.
Solicitor Michael Fitzgerald said the National Education Association led the challenge and that the court’s injunction halted the Department’s enforcement while the case proceeds. He explained the court’s ruling focused on procedural defects, including alleged failures to follow the Administrative Procedure Act and vagueness in the government’s directives. The injunction applies to school districts that have local affiliates of the NEA; Spring-Ford’s local affiliate, the Spring Ford Education Association, is affiliated with the Pennsylvania State Education Association and thus falls within the court’s order.
Fitzgerald advised the board that, as a result, the Department of Education cannot compel districts covered by the injunction to implement the recently issued guidance for the foreseeable future. The solicitor’s update did not include new district policies enacted in response to the federal guidance; he framed the matter as a legal update and said the injunction remains in effect for now.
Board members did not take formal action on the issue at the meeting. The solicitor recommended monitoring the litigation and any subsequent federal actions and advised the district to await further legal clarity before changing local practices in response to the previously issued federal guidance.

