BOSTON (AP) – A federal judge in Boston on Tuesday blocked Trump administration’s plan to cut hundreds of millions of dollars Teacher trainingfinds that cuts already have an impact on training programs aimed at addressing the national shortage of teachers.
US District Judge Mining Jr. sided with eight states that demanded temporary restraining orders. The state argued that efforts from President Donald Trump’s administration are pushing for cuts Eliminate diversity, equity and comprehensive programs.
Republican Trump says he wants to dismantle Education Departmentand his administration has already begun overhauling many of its work, including cutting dozens of contracts that have been dismissed as “awakening” and useless.
The plaintiffs alleged that the federal education department had suddenly terminated two programs (teacher quality partnership and two programs supporting effective educator development without notice in February. They said the two programs provided over $600 million in grants for teacher preparation programs in subject areas such as mathematics, science and special education. They said the data showed that the program was leading to increased teacher retention, ensuring that educators remain in the profession for more than five years.
appointed by Democrat Joe Biden, Joun found that cancellations violated administrative law by failing to give a clear explanation, and that the state is already at risk of lasting harm as they have to cancel teacher training programs and fire people.
“The records show that if I deny TRO, it would be furious that public schools, public universities, students, teachers and teachers would rely on,” he wrote using the acronym for temporary restraining orders.
Laura Faer, claiming on behalf of California plaintiffs, told Joun on Monday that a temporary restraining order is urgently needed as grant freezes have already been laid off and the program has been suspended.
“The situation is disastrous right now,” she told the court. “As we speak, statewide programs face the possibility of closures and layoffs.”
California has been joined by Massachusetts, New Jersey, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, New York and Wisconsin.
Adelaide Pagano, who represents Massachusetts, argued that the education department has no authority to cancel grants, and the move is not following the law. The form letter to the recipient failed to provide a clear and reasonable explanation of the cancellation and incorrectly changed the criteria midway through the grant process.
Michael Fitzgerald, who represents the government, argued that the education department is within its power to cancel grants for programs that suspected of violating federal anti-discrimination laws and no longer fit into the department’s priorities. He also argued that if he wins the lawsuit, there is no need for immediate relief, as the grantee can recover the frozen funds.
___
Washington Associated Press Writer Lindsay Whitehurst contributed.
Source link
