Federal Judge Blocks New Hampshire’s Confusing Anti-DEI Law
A federal judge has blocked New Hampshire’s newly implemented Anti-Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) law, which has stirred significant controversy regarding its ambiguous provisions. The law allows the state education commissioner to revoke state funding from educational institutions that engage in DEI practices. Critics argue that the lack of clear definitions for DEI activities makes compliance nearly impossible.
Concerns Over Ambiguity and Enforcement
Judge Landya McCafferty highlighted the sweeping nature of the law, stating it could hinder the operation of educational institutions if enforced strictly. She pointed out that the ambiguities surrounding “DEI” extend to the prohibition of recognized teaching and administrative practices. This scenario raises severe questions about the feasibility of running schools under such constraints.
- The law bans “DEI-related” activities, which are poorly defined.
- McCafferty criticized this vagueness, suggesting it fails to provide necessary clarity and improperly delegates legal authority to unelected officials.
- Arbitrary enforcement of the law began in July, shortly after its enactment.
Impacts on Educational Institutions
After the law’s passage, the outgoing education commissioner attempted to enforce its provisions against private colleges, overlooking K-12 schools funded by the state’s education freedom account program. McCafferty has raised alarms about the risk of arbitrary enforcement against institutions that support politically marginalized groups, such as transgender students.
Legal Background and Ongoing Litigation
Judge McCafferty, appointed by President Barack Obama, issued a temporary restraining order against the law last month. Following this, some Republican lawmakers accused her of partisan overreach. Her recent preliminary injunction will sustain while the legal challenges continue.
The New Hampshire Department of Justice has not yet provided a statement regarding the judge’s ruling. As this case unfolds, many educational stakeholders remain concerned about the implications for students and institutions throughout the state.
