 "US Supreme Court allows Trump administration to block teacher-training grants that promote DEI")
In a controversial ruling, the US Supreme Court allowed President Donald Trump and his administration to temporarily freeze $65m in teacher-training grants. In a close 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court allowing the White House to block the grant, intends to promote diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. The decision was delivered on Friday afternoon.
While five of the court’s conservatives – Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh supported the block, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson all dissented. The court argued that the states made it clear “that they have the financial wherewithal to keep their programs running.”
The freezing of funds would cut more than 10 programs that had been temporarily blocked by a federal judge in Boston. Arguing that the move would affect training programs aimed at addressing a nationwide teacher shortage, the Boston appeals court rejected an appeal from the Trump administration to allow them to resume. Friday’s ruling was the first time in three attempts that the nation’s highest court gave the administration what it wanted on an emergency basis.
Trump’s battle against the Education Department
The Republican president has also signed an executive order calling for the dismantling of the education department. In light of this, his administration has already started overhauling much of its work, including cutting dozens of contracts it dismissed as “woke” and wasteful.
The two programs who grants the Supreme Court has allowed Trump to block are the Teacher Quality Partnership and Supporting Effective Educator Development. The federal government provide more than $600m in grants for teacher preparation programs, often in subject areas such as math, science and special education. Several states have argued that the data has shown increased teacher retention rates and ensured that educators remain in the profession beyond five years.
While dissenting the majority, Kagan wrote that there was no reason for the court’s emergency intervention. “Nowhere in its papers does the Government defend the legality of cancelling the education grants at issue here,” Kagan wrote. “It is beyond puzzling that a majority of Justices conceive of the government’s application as an emergency," Brown Jackson wrote in a separate opinion.
Impact Shorts
More ShortsThe administration halted the programs without notice in February. Joun, an appointee of Democratic president Joe Biden, found that the cancellations probably violated a federal law that requires a clear explanation. It is pertinent to note that the appellate panel that rejected the administration’s request for a stay also was made up of judges appointed by Democrats. California is leading the ongoing lawsuit, joined by Massachusetts, New Jersey, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, New York and Wisconsin.
With inputs from agencies.
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
