One of the strongest moves against leftist domination of our educational institutions was the administration’s forthright statement that the Education Department was going to battle against the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) agenda that has transformed so many colleges and universities from educational institutions to propaganda machines. Had the woke officials met their match?

A recent pair of court decisions make it seem that the administration is unwilling to continue this fight. In today’s Martin Center article, T. J. Harker discusses this lamentable state of affairs.

In February 2025, a newly installed Trump Department of Education (ED) issued a so-called Dear Colleague Letter. The letter put educational institutions on notice that ED intended to enforce the nation’s anti-discrimination laws, particularly those in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and in the Constitution. It further specified that “discriminatory practices” would not be tolerated merely because they had been repackaged “under the banner of ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ (‘DEI’).”

In February 2025, a newly installed Trump Department of Education (ED) issued a so-called Dear Colleague Letter. The letter put educational institutions on notice that ED intended to enforce the nation’s anti-discrimination laws, particularly those in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and in the Constitution. It further specified that “discriminatory practices” would not be tolerated merely because they had been repackaged “under the banner of ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ (‘DEI’).”

As one would expect, the education blob ginned up lawsuits against this move. It found some sympathetic judges to rule that the administration’s action was illegal. Harker points out that the two rulings were feeble efforts that reflected political activism rather than legal reasoning.

What one would not have expected is the administration’s decision not to further litigate the issue.

Once sued, ED staffed the case with trial attorneys who supported the mission. Those trial attorneys would have anticipated an adverse district-court ruling from the outset, steeling themselves for the inevitable appeals process. In short, everything about the DCL — its contents, release, and the ensuing district-court litigation — would have been handled by political appointees or trial attorneys hand-selected based upon their support for the cause.

Once sued, ED staffed the case with trial attorneys who supported the mission. Those trial attorneys would have anticipated an adverse district-court ruling from the outset, steeling themselves for the inevitable appeals process. In short, everything about the DCL — its contents, release, and the ensuing district-court litigation — would have been handled by political appointees or trial attorneys hand-selected based upon their support for the cause.

Harker thinks that career appellate lawyers in the Justice Department have chosen to cave in rather than continue the fight against DEI. He observes that the left has brought a stunning number of suits against the administration, stretching its legal resources very thin.

The left usually wins in lawfare, and this seems to be another instance. Let’s hope that this is just a tactical retreat and that the administration will continue fighting against the DEI plague.

© National Review