The news continues to swirl around higher education and aspects of its future. From a federal judge blocking the Trump administration’s efforts to stamp out “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) programs, to projected issues with the Pell Grant program, and rumors of what is to be done about the Department of Education (ED), let’s take a look at the recent highlights.
 

United States District Judge Adam B. Abelson issued a preliminary injunction on Friday which temporarily blocks most of the Trump administration’s efforts to abolish DEI. The Biden nominee judge found that Trump’s two executive orders (EOs) pertaining to DEI measures were “constitutionally vague” and “appeared to violate free speech protections.” This injunction comes as colleges and universities were making efforts to comply with the Trump EOs by February 28, or risk investigation that could shut off their federal funding. An article in the Chronicle of Higher Education clarifies how the administration is being curtailed in anti-DEI measures, 
 

The administration, he said, must not pause, terminate, or change federal contracts or grants it considers equity-related while a lawsuit filed by the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education, the American Association of University Professors, and others moves forward.

It is unsurprising that the academy is clinging fast to DEI. After all, DEI is deeply entrenched in higher education, from widespread faculty and administrative hiring practices, to a core aspect of an institution’s central learning objectives. It is likely that higher education will continue to push back against efforts to dismantle the DEI beast.
 

Regarding compliance, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has launched an investigation into the University of Maine system for allegedly “disregarding” Trump’s order to ban transgender women from playing in women’s sports. The USDA investigation came a day after the Office of Civil Rights launched an investigation of their own into the Maine Department of Education and a school district. For context, the EO bans transgender athletes assigned male at birth from competing on women's teams, and rescinds federal funding to schools who do not comply. Maine Governor Janet Mills and Attorney General Aaron Frey pledged to fight attempts to cut off the state’s funding, Mills said in a written statement “In America, the President is neither a King nor a dictator, as much as this one tries to act like it—and it is the rule of law that prevents him from being so.” More than twenty states have yet to change participation policies “saying Trump’s order does not override federal and state law.”
 

In somewhat happier news, the American Bar Association (ABA) has announced its suspended enforcement of “diversity and inclusion” requirements. This announcement is a step in the right direction, though it does not abolish the requirements altogether—a potential next step for the ABA. Why is this significant? A statement by the National Association of Scholars explains, “This matters because the ABA accredits America’s law schools. The ABA’s diversity and inclusion standards have pressured law schools into adopting and maintaining racial preferences.” Pressure to conform to ideology in order to achieve accreditation is a tactic often seen in higher education. The ABA’s decision may right some of the wrongs in the system, but total elimination of DEI requirements is a sound next step.
 

Financial woes apparently plague the Pell Grant program. ED oversees the federal Pell Grant program, disbursing need-based financial aid to low-income students—note that over thirty percent of American college students receive Pell Grant funds. The Congressional Budget Office projected a $2.7 billion shortfall for the next fiscal year, and Congress will need to act some time before September 30 to remedy the situation. The Pell Grant program has been teetering on the edge of a budget shortfall for some time now. Last year’s projected enrollment decline due to the Free Application for Federal Student Aid rollout fiasco saved the Pell Grant program from a predicted shortfall. But an Inside Higher Education article explains the current situation,
 

In reality, enrollments increased by 5 percent. And because of changes in the FAFSA formula, the number of Pell recipients increased, too, by 12.6 percent, according to a report from the Urban Institute. These unexpected increases may have actually expedited the program’s budget crisis. 

With rumors circulating about whether the Department of Education will be around for much longer, we will have to wait and see what becomes of the Pell Grant program—or whether Congress will step in to save it. 
 

In the meantime, ED budget cuts are seemingly the order of the day for the Trump administration, but let us not forget that perhaps ED needs deeper reform (to which the National Association of Scholars has proposed a comprehensive plan).
 

Until next week.

About the NAS