Listen to the article
The Trump Justice Department has launched investigations into three Michigan public school districts over gender-related instruction and moved to intervene in a Los Angeles lawsuit challenging race-based school programs, marking a significant escalation in the administration’s involvement in educational policy disputes nationwide.
The Civil Rights Division announced on Wednesday it is examining whether Detroit Public Schools Community District, Godfrey-Lee Public Schools, and the Lansing School District have included “sexual orientation and gender ideology content” in classes from pre-kindergarten through 12th grade. If such instruction exists, investigators will assess whether parents were properly notified of opt-out rights and whether the districts restrict access to bathrooms and locker rooms based on biological sex.
Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon emphasized the department’s commitment to enforcing parental rights and Title IX provisions. “This Department of Justice is fiercely committed to ending the growing trend of local school authorities embedding sexuality and gender ideology in every aspect of public education,” Dhillon stated.
She referenced Supreme Court precedent affirming parents’ rights to direct their children’s religious upbringing, including exempting them from instruction that conflicts with their beliefs. Dhillon also noted that Title IX requires protecting students “by ensuring that they have unfettered access to bathrooms and locker rooms of their biological sex.”
The department highlighted that these Michigan districts receive “hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer funding” and will be evaluated for compliance with Title IX and the Supreme Court’s 2025 Mahmoud v. Taylor decision. Officials noted that no conclusions have been reached at this stage of the investigations.
In a separate but concurrent action, the Justice Department is seeking to intervene in a lawsuit filed by the nonprofit 1776 Project Foundation against the Los Angeles Unified School District’s Predominately Hispanic, Black, Asian, and Other (PHBAO) Program.
According to the department’s proposed complaint, the LAUSD program categorizes students by race and neighborhood demographics to determine funding and magnet school admissions. The system separates students into “Anglo” (White) and other racial categories, designating neighborhoods with fewer than 30% White residents as disadvantaged. Schools in these areas receive additional funding, reduced student-teacher ratios by 5.5 students, and preferences in magnet school admissions.
The complaint argues that LAUSD effectively treats attending school with non-White students “as a disadvantage equal to attending an overcrowded school,” raising constitutional concerns about equal protection.
Attorney General Pam Bondi emphasized the federal government’s role in enforcing equal protection guarantees. “Treating Americans equally is not a suggestion — it is a core constitutional guarantee that educational institutions must follow,” Bondi said in the department’s statement.
Dhillon added that students “should never be classified or treated differently because of their race,” calling racial discrimination both “unlawful and un-American.” First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli suggested LAUSD’s desegregation program has “outlived its usefulness to the point of being unconstitutional.”
These actions reflect the Trump administration’s broader push against what it characterizes as progressive educational policies. The Michigan investigations come amid heightened national debate over parental rights and gender-related school policies, while the LAUSD intervention aligns with the administration’s opposition to race-conscious educational programs following recent Supreme Court decisions limiting affirmative action.
Representatives from the Michigan school districts did not immediately respond to requests for comment. LAUSD issued a limited statement, citing the pending litigation: “Because this matter involves pending litigation, we are unable to comment on the specifics. However, Los Angeles Unified remains firmly committed to ensuring all students have meaningful access to services and enriching educational opportunities.”
The Michigan investigations remain ongoing, and the LAUSD case continues in federal court, marking significant developments in the administration’s educational policy agenda.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
13 Comments
These are complex, politically-charged topics. I hope the DOJ’s investigation is thorough and objective, drawing on diverse perspectives to develop fair, practical solutions that serve the best interests of students.
Navigating the intersections of education, civil rights, and parental choice is never easy. I’m curious to see how the DOJ’s actions impact the ongoing debates around these sensitive issues in schools.
This is a concerning development. Students deserve a well-rounded education that respects diversity and parental rights. The DOJ should investigate impartially to ensure policies align with the law and community values.
I agree, a balanced approach that protects all students is important. Hopefully the DOJ can provide clarity on the appropriate scope of curriculum and parental involvement.
Gender identity and expression are complex, nuanced topics. I appreciate the DOJ’s commitment to upholding civil rights, but the specifics of curriculum and facilities will require nuanced, collaborative solutions.
School policies should empower students, support families, and align with the law. The DOJ’s involvement signals the gravity of these debates, and I’m hopeful they can help chart a productive path forward.
As a taxpayer, I want my child’s education to be inclusive and evidence-based. But I also respect parental rights. This is a delicate balance that the DOJ will need to carefully consider.
Reasonable people can disagree on the appropriate scope of gender-related curriculum. I’m glad the DOJ is stepping in to clarify legal requirements and parental rights, but the implementation details will be critical.
As a parent, I appreciate the DOJ’s efforts to protect parental rights and ensure curriculum is age-appropriate. But I also want schools to create inclusive, supportive environments. This will require careful deliberation.
Well said. Finding the right balance is crucial. Hopefully all stakeholders can come together constructively to address these sensitive issues in our schools.
These issues highlight the need for clear, consistent policies that protect all students while respecting family values. I hope the DOJ’s actions lead to constructive dialogue and thoughtful compromise.
It’s tricky to balance educational needs, parental rights, and anti-discrimination laws. I’m curious to see how the DOJ’s investigation unfolds and what recommendations they make to resolve these complex issues.
Absolutely, these are nuanced topics without easy answers. A thoughtful, evidence-based approach will be key to finding the right path forward for schools and families.