August 2025
Recent court rulings have sent conflicting signals about the future of federal funding for research and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs.
On August 21, the Supreme Court ruled 5–4, that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) could proceed with terminating millions of dollars in DEI-related research grants. The majority held that a lower court lacked jurisdiction to order the restoration of the grants in June, directing plaintiffs to pursue their cases in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims instead of federal district court.
Days earlier, two rulings involving the Education Department moved in the opposite direction. On August 18, Brendan Hurson, a federal judge in Maryland, ordered the reinstatement of the department’s Comprehensive Centers and Regional Educational Laboratories, which provide technical expertise programs to states and schools. Hurson found the closures violated federal law and the Constitution’s separation of powers and instructed parties to develop a plan for reopening the programs, which operate through contractors.
On August 14, another Maryland federal judge, Stephanie Gallagher, blocked an Education Department effort to threaten schools and universities that run DEI initiatives with the loss of federal funding. Gallagher ruled that the department had failed to follow required procedures. The guidance has been on hold since April, when another court blocked portions of the department’s broader anti-DEI measures.
In February, the department had issued a memorandum stating that any consideration of race in admissions, financial aid, hiring, or other aspects of academic and student life would violate federal civil rights law.
“APM Reports” Coverage of Federal Research Cuts, Including AERA Lawsuit
On April 21, APM Reports ran a package of stories examining the impact of federal education research cuts.
One report noted that without legal action by AERA and the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness (SREE), the results of a large study on reading might never have been released. Following lawsuits, the Education Department said it would voluntarily reinstate the contract for the study.
AERA Executive Director Tabbye Chavous told APM that once AERA and SREE filed their lawsuit, the department began to restore some contracts. Still, she emphasized that most of the Institute of Education Sciences’ research and data functions have not been restarted, despite congressional mandates, and staff layoffs have left the Education Department unable to complete much of the reinstated work.
Another story highlighted the administration’s cancellation of a long-running series of surveys on U.S. high schools, which had been conducted for more than 50 years. The termination leaves a major gap in data used to track trends in U.S. education.
AERA Executive Director Emerita Felice Levine told APM: “The reduction—annihilation—of NCES [National Center for Education Statistics] functionally is a very serious issue. . . . It really is the backbone of knowledge building and policymaking.”
A third story raised concerns about the future of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). Several researchers warned that deep cuts at the Education Department threaten NAEP’s quality.
Adam Gamaron, president of the William T. Grant Foundation, told APM: “You need a staff. The fact that NCES now only has three employees indicates they can’t possibly implement NAEP at a high level of quality, because they lack the in-house expertise to oversee the work. So that is deeply troubling.”