NEA and NEA-NH v. U.S. Department of Education

On March 5, 2025, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of New Hampshire, the ACLU of Massachusetts, the National Education Association (NEA), and the National Education Association–New Hampshire, filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in New Hampshire, against the U.S. Department of Education (ED). The lawsuit challenges the Department of Education’s Feb. 14, 2025, Dear Colleague Letter, which threatens federal funding cuts for education institutions nationwide for engaging in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts; and a 14-day window before “appropriate measures” would be taken.

The lawsuit argues that ED has overstepped its legal authority by:

• Imposing unfounded and vague legal restrictions that violate due process and the First Amendment;
• Limiting academic freedom; and
• Impermissibly dictating what educators can teach and what students are allowed to learn.

The Department of Education claims, without legal or factual basis, that a broad range of DEI-related education policies and practices are unlawful. The lawsuit contends that ED has no authority to dictate curriculum or educational programs, and that federal law explicitly protects education institutions’ ability to shape their own curriculum, including programs that reflect and celebrate diversity.

Educators across the country are already feeling the chilling effects of the ED’s overreach. By unlawfully restricting speech and academic freedom, and opening educators to arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement, ED seeks to violate fundamental constitutional and legal protections. In response, the lawsuit challenges the letter on four key legal grounds:

• Violation of the First Amendment – The letter unconstitutionally restricts speech by prohibiting educators from teaching about race, diversity, equity, and inclusion. It also broadly bans DEI programs, including student groups and faculty associations, coercing educational institutions into self-censorship through the threat of losing federal funding. In higher education, the government cannot dictate what professors teach, and in K-12 schools, Congress has prohibited the federal government from dictating curriculum.
• Violation of the Fifth Amendment – The letter fails to define key terms and practices, leaving educators uncertain about what is prohibited and vulnerable to arbitrary enforcement. By failing to establish clear standards, ED creates a chilling effect, forcing teachers to avoid important discussions in history, English literature, and more, or to risk arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement that threatens their professions.
• Violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) – The letter imposes new legal obligations without the required process and justification, making it arbitrary, capricious, and legally invalid. ED oversteps its authority and ignores decades of legal precedent and its own prior guidance on civil rights law, failing to explain why it is now reversing course on long-standing principles of equity and inclusion.
• Misrepresentation of Supreme Court Precedent – The letter misstates and overstates the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard. The decision only addressed race as a formal admissions factor in higher education — it did not ban curriculum, student groups, DEI programming, or race-neutral diversity initiatives.

On March 21, 2025, we filed a First Amended Complaint and Motion for a Preliminary Injunction. On April 7, 2025, we filed a motion for a temporary restraining order in light of new certification requirements imposed by the ED, but this motion was mooted by an agreement entered into between the parties.

On April 24, 2025, the Court issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the letter against the plaintiffs, their members, and any entity that employs, contracts with, or works with one or more of plaintiffs or plaintiffs’ member.

On June 10, 2025, Plaintiffs filed their motion for summary judgment.