BOSTON (AP) — A federal judge in Boston on Tuesday blocked the Trump administration’s plan to cut hundreds of millions of dollars for teacher training, finding that cuts are already affecting training programs aimed at addressing a nationwide teacher shortage.
U.S. District Judge Myong Joun sided with the eight states that had requested a temporary restraining order. The states argued the cuts were likely driven by efforts from President Donald Trump’s administration to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion programs.
Trump, a Republican, has said he wants to dismantle the Education Department, and his administration has already started overhauling much of its work, including cutting dozens of contracts it dismissed as “woke” and wasteful.
The plaintiffs argued the federal Education Department abruptly ended two programs — the Teacher Quality Partnership and Supporting Effective Educator Development — without notice in February. They said the two programs provided upwards of $600 million in grants for teacher preparation programs, often in subject areas, such as math, science and special education. They said data has shown the programs had led to increased teacher retention rates and ensured that educators remain in the profession beyond five years.
Joun, who was appointed by President Joe Biden, a Democrat, found that the cancelations violated administrative law by failing to give a clear explanation and that the states are at risk of lasting harm because they’re already having to cancel teacher training programs and lay people off.
“The record shows that if I were to deny the TRO, dozens of programs upon which public schools, public universities, students, teachers, and faculty rely will be gutted,” he wrote, using the acronym for temporary restraining order.
Laura Faer, arguing on behalf of the plaintiffs for California, told Joun on Monday that a temporary restraining order was urgently needed because the freeze on grants was already leading to staff being laid off and program being halted.
“The situation is dire right now,” she told the court. “As we speak, our programs across the state are facing the possibility of closure, termination.”
California is joined by Massachusetts, New Jersey, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, New York and Wisconsin.
Adelaide Pagano, representing Massachusetts, argued the Education Department lacked the authority to cancel the grants and its move was not in accordance with the law. The form letters to grantees, she said, failed to provide a clear and reasonable explanation for the cancellations and wrongly changed the criteria in the middle of the grant process, something they could consider for future funding but not money already allocated.
Michael Fitzgerald, representing the government, insisted the Education Department was well within its authority to cancel the grants over the programs suspected of violating federal anti-discrimination laws and no longer aligning with the department’s priorities. He also argued there was no need for immediate relief, since grantees could recoup their frozen funds if they prevail in their lawsuit.
___
Associated Press writer Lindsay Whitehurst in Washington contributed.
