Education lawsuits dominated U.S. courts through 2025 and into 2026, with billions in federal funding, the future of the U.S. Department of Education, DEI policy, and decades-old state school finance fights all before judges at the same time. Most of the federal activity grew out of Trump administration executive actions and the states, unions, and civil rights groups challenging them. Several of the biggest cases have now been decided; others are still live.
The $6.8 Billion Federal Funding Freeze
On July 14, 2025, a coalition of 22 state attorneys general, two governors, and the District of Columbia sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island over the administration’s decision to withhold $6.8 billion in congressionally appropriated education funding. The case, State of California v. McMahon, named President Trump, Education Secretary Linda McMahon, and OMB Director Russell Vought as defendants.1Education Week. Two Dozen States Sue Trump Over $6.8 Billion School Funding Freeze
The money covered seven grant programs funding teacher training, English-learner services, before- and after-school programs, migrant education, academic enrichment, and adult literacy. The administration had put the funds “under review” on June 30, 2025, the day they were scheduled for release. North Carolina alone stood to lose more than $165 million, putting 981 educator positions at risk.2WRAL. Attorney General Jackson, NC Leaders Save Federal Education Funding
The plaintiffs argued the freeze violated the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, the Spending Clause, and the Administrative Procedure Act: a president cannot refuse to spend money Congress has appropriated without initiating a formal rescission, which the administration never did.3NY Attorney General. Attorney General James Sues Trump Administration Illegally Freezing Billions
The case ended quickly. The government began releasing funds the week of July 28, 2025 and stipulated to release the rest by early October. The states withdrew their preliminary injunction motion and moved to dismiss without prejudice on August 25, 2025. The court granted dismissal on September 12, 2025.4Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. State of California v. McMahon
The Fight Over Dismantling the Education Department
On March 20, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order titled “Improving Education Outcomes by Empowering Parents, States, and Communities,” directing the Secretary of Education to begin closing the department and shifting authority to the states.5White House. Improving Education Outcomes by Empowering Parents, States, and Communities What followed was a mass layoff of more than 1,400 employees, roughly half the workforce, and a push to move functions to agencies like the Small Business Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services.6The Arc. McMahon v. New York
Two sets of plaintiffs — one a coalition of states, the other the Somerville and Easthampton school districts in Massachusetts joined by the American Federation of Teachers — sued, and the cases were consolidated as McMahon v. New York. They argued that only Congress can abolish a federal agency and that the layoffs stripped the department of its ability to carry out congressionally mandated work in special education, financial aid, and civil rights enforcement.7PBS NewsHour. Judge Blocks Trump’s Executive Order to Dismantle Education Department
U.S. District Judge Myong Joun in Boston granted a preliminary injunction on May 22, 2025, blocking the layoffs and ordering reinstatement of terminated workers. He found the cuts would “likely cripple the Department” and cause “irreparable harm” to vulnerable students. The First Circuit refused to stay the order.
The Supreme Court intervened. On July 14, 2025, it issued an emergency order lifting the injunction and letting the layoffs and dismantling continue while litigation proceeded. Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justices Kagan and Jackson, wrote in dissent: “This decision is indefensible. It hands the Executive the power to repeal statutes by firing all those necessary to carry them out.”6The Arc. McMahon v. New York The stay is still in effect while the First Circuit appeal plays out.8SCOTUSblog. McMahon v. State of New York
A parallel suit, NAACP v. United States, was filed in the District of Maryland by the NAACP, the National Education Association, and public school parents. The district court denied a preliminary injunction in August 2025 in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling in the other case, but in May 2026 Judge Julie R. Rubin denied the government’s motion to dismiss, letting the case proceed on the merits.9Cohen Milstein. NAACP v. U.S. and U.S. Dept. of Education
The DEI “Dear Colleague” Letter Struck Down
On February 14, 2025, the Department of Education issued a “Dear Colleague” letter from then-acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Craig Trainor characterizing diversity, equity, and inclusion programs as unlawful, giving schools 14 days to end them, and threatening federal funding cuts for noncompliance. The letter cited the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard.10UPI. Department of Education Backs Down on DEI Lawsuit
The ACLU and NEA sued, arguing the directive violated the First Amendment by chilling educators’ speech, was unconstitutionally vague under the Fifth Amendment, and bypassed the rulemaking the APA required. They also said it misread Students for Fair Admissions, which addressed race in formal admissions decisions and did not ban DEI broadly.11ACLU. ACLU and NEA Sue U.S. Department of Education Over Unlawful Attack on Educational Equity
District Court Judge Landya McCafferty found the directive’s framing of DEI conflicted with its ordinary meaning of fostering “a group culture of equitable and inclusive treatment,” and that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed. The government ultimately conceded. By mid-2026 the court entered a final ruling permanently invalidating the letter and its certification requirement, and the department cannot enforce or revive it.12ACLU. Department of Education Backs Down on Unlawful Directive Targeting Educational Equity
Cancelled Grants and the Broader Federal Docket
Education Week counted 72 lawsuits filed against the Trump administration over K-12 policy in 2025 alone. Of the 54 with some resolution by late that year, the administration won 26 and lost 28. Plaintiffs prevailed in 36 trial-court rulings; higher courts reversed at least eight of those.13Education Week. Trump’s Education Policies Spurred 70 Lawsuits — How Many Is He Winning
Several cancelled-grant fights stand out:
- Teacher training grants. The department cancelled 104 of 109 teacher recruitment and professional development grants in February 2025, worth over $65 million, citing “objectionable” DEI content. A Massachusetts federal judge ordered them reinstated for the plaintiff states, but the Supreme Court later let the administration keep them halted while litigation continued.14SCOTUSblog. Trump Asks Supreme Court to Allow Cancellation of Grants to Teachers
- English-learner grants. In June 2026 the Southern Poverty Law Center and NEA sued in Rhode Island federal court over the cancellation of 28 national professional development grants for teachers of English learners, alleging the department flagged grants using “mechanical keyword searches” for terms like “equity” and “diversity” instead of any substantive review.15K-12 Dive. Education Department Faces New Lawsuit Over Cancelled Professional Development Grants
- Mental health grants. Sixteen states won at the Ninth Circuit after a district court found the cancellation of $1 billion in school mental health grants was “arbitrary and capricious.”15K-12 Dive. Education Department Faces New Lawsuit Over Cancelled Professional Development Grants
- COVID-19 relief deadlines. Seventeen Democratic attorneys general challenged the abrupt reversal of deadlines for spending pandemic-relief aid. A judge ordered the original extensions restored, and the department eventually complied for all states.13Education Week. Trump’s Education Policies Spurred 70 Lawsuits — How Many Is He Winning
DOJ Civil Rights Enforcement in Education
The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division has reoriented its education enforcement. The most visible actions since 2025:
Harvard antisemitism suit. The DOJ sued Harvard on March 20, 2026, alleging Title VI violations through “deliberate indifference” to antisemitic harassment after the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack. The government is seeking a court-appointed monitor, a permanent bar on future federal funding, and the return of nearly $1 billion in grants.16Department of Justice. Justice Department Sues Harvard University for Antisemitism Harvard moved to dismiss in May 2026, calling the claims “outdated” and citing reforms including its adoption of the IHRA definition of antisemitism. In April 2026 the judge denied Harvard’s bid to transfer the case.17The Harvard Crimson. Harvard DOJ Antisemitism Dismissal
Loudoun County religious discrimination. In December 2025 the DOJ moved to intervene in S.W. v. Loudoun County School Board, alleging the board violated the Equal Protection Clause when it punished two Christian students who objected after a female student entered the boys’ locker room under the district’s transgender accommodation policy. The students were suspended for ten days, and their religious objections were classified as “sexual harassment.” A preliminary injunction protecting the students was granted in October 2025, and the DOJ’s motion to intervene was still pending in early 2026.18Department of Justice. Justice Department Sues Loudoun County for Violating Equal Protection of Christian Students19Department of Justice. S.W. v. Loudoun County School Board, Memorandum in Support of Motion to Intervene
Title VI disparate-impact rollback. In December 2025 the DOJ finalized a rule rescinding portions of its Title VI regulations that had barred policies with a discriminatory disparate impact, following a Trump executive order directing elimination of that standard.20EducationCounsel. E-Update for December 22, 2025
North Carolina’s Leandro Case Dies After Three Decades
On April 2, 2026, the North Carolina Supreme Court ended the state’s landmark Leandro school funding case in a 4-3 ruling. Filed in 1994 by school boards in five low-wealth counties, the case produced the 1997 ruling that the state constitution guarantees every child a “sound basic education.” By 2021 trial courts had approved a remedial plan costing at least $5.6 billion.21WRAL. Timeline: Leandro Lawsuit, NC Supreme Court, General Assembly
The majority — Chief Justice Paul Newby and Justices Philip Berger Jr., Tamara Barringer, and Trey Allen — held that the trial court had lost jurisdiction once the case expanded from specific students and districts into a challenge to the whole education system. Every ruling in the case since July 2017 was declared void, the case was dismissed with prejudice, and the remedial plan was abandoned.22EdNC. Leandro Decision
Justice Allison Riggs wrote in dissent that “the majority distorts the facts and history of this case, hides behind technicalities rather than addressing the core issue affecting our children.” Justice Richard Dietz, also dissenting, described the litigation as having become a study in “partisanship, bias, generalization, straw-manning, and appeals to ignorance,” while suggesting a procedurally streamlined class action could still carry the issue forward.22EdNC. Leandro Decision Governor Josh Stein criticized the ruling and noted the General Assembly had dropped the state to 49th in per-pupil investment.23Office of the Governor of North Carolina. Governor Stein Responds to NC Supreme Court’s Leandro Decision The 1997 right to a sound basic education survives, but with no court-ordered mechanism to enforce it.
Pennsylvania and Wisconsin Funding Suits
Pennsylvania took the opposite path. A Commonwealth Court ruling on February 7, 2023 declared the state’s school funding system unconstitutional, and when legislative leaders chose not to appeal, the decision became final. The court held the system failed to provide a “comprehensive, effective, and contemporary public education.”24Public Interest Law Center. School Funding Lawsuit
A state commission put the gap at roughly $4.5 to $6.2 billion. The 2024-25 budget included a $494 million adequacy allocation for the most underfunded districts, along with increases for special education, career and technical education, and mental health.25Education Law Center-PA. Historic Victory in the Fight for Fair Funding26PA Schools Work. Funding Breakdown Memo The 2025-26 budget continued the formula, and the governor’s proposed 2026-27 budget maintains it, with the administration citing “nearly $3 billion additional dollars” invested over three years.27Pennsylvania Governor’s Office. 2026-27 Budget in Brief Advocates say annual increases still cover only a fraction of the gap and want a binding multi-year schedule.
Wisconsin is in the earlier stages. On February 23, 2026, a coalition led by the Wisconsin PTA and the Eau Claire, Green Bay, Beloit, Necedah, and Adams-Friendship school districts filed suit in Eau Claire County Circuit Court, arguing the legislature is failing its state constitutional obligation to fund public schools. The complaint says state funding has not kept pace with costs, the special education reimbursement rate is unconstitutionally low, and the system forces districts to rely on local property tax referendums, while private school voucher programs receive what plaintiffs call “preferred treatment.”28WEAU. Eau Claire Schools, Teachers Join Statewide Coalition Lawsuit Against State Legislature Legislative Republicans moved to dismiss in April 2026, arguing a 2000 Wisconsin Supreme Court decision forecloses the claims. Observers expect the case to reach the state Supreme Court.29Wisconsin Public Radio. Wisconsin Republicans Court Dismiss Public Education Funding Lawsuit
Miami-Dade School Board Civil Rights Suit
On April 30, 2026, two sisters identified as Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 filed a federal civil rights suit against the Miami-Dade County School Board in the Southern District of Florida. They allege that P.E. teacher Joseph Edward Tolliver sexually assaulted them throughout the 2021-2022 school year at Campbell Drive K-8 Center in Homestead and that school officials acted with “deliberate indifference” despite “actual notice” of his conduct.30The Center Square. Federal Lawsuit Against Miami-Dade County School Board Over Response to Sexual Assaults
The complaint says the sisters reported the abuse but were labeled “not trustworthy” and “troublemakers,” a counselor discouraged their mother from pursuing it, and the principal expelled both girls and threatened police action if they returned. Tolliver was arrested in February 2023 on a charge of lewd and lascivious battery on a child and released on bond, and the district began termination proceedings after the arrest.31NBC Miami. Mom’s Message to Homestead P.E. Teacher Accused of Sex With Teen Daughter The suit seeks compensatory damages for the board’s alleged failure to investigate, remove, or supervise despite prior reports.