Georgia is joining several other states in complying with a directive from the U.S. Department of Education, requiring the removal of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs in public schools. Failure to do so could result in the loss of federal funding, which is crucial for maintaining educational programs across the state.
Meghan Frick, the director of communications at the Georgia Department of Education, confirmed in an email to WABE that the state would comply with the federal government’s directive. Frick emphasized that Georgia’s public schools rely on federal funding to support essential programs, particularly for economically disadvantaged students, special education, and other critical services. She explained that the state’s public schools would need this funding to continue serving vulnerable student populations effectively.
In fact, according to the Georgia Department of Education, the state received more than $1 billion in federal funding for the 2025 fiscal year. This funding is directed towards various educational needs, including those for students with disabilities, students experiencing homelessness, and other at-risk groups. Losing these federal dollars would significantly affect the ability of public schools to provide necessary resources and services to these students.
The U.S. Department of Education issued a letter on April 3, directing state and local education agencies to sign a certification indicating their commitment to adhering to federal non-discrimination standards. The letter specifically calls out DEI programs, declaring them to be “illegal” and in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This civil rights law prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, colour, or national origin in programs and activities that receive federal assistance.
According to the letter, any educational institution that continues to implement DEI programs could lose federal funding and face legal consequences from the U.S. Department of Justice. The letter further asserts that using DEI programs to give preference to one race over another is impermissible, referencing the text of Title VI and previous assurances made by schools to avoid discriminatory practices. The letter’s language is clear: the use of certain DEI practices is not only a violation of federal law but could also result in substantial legal repercussions, including fines and the potential for lawsuits.
Frick explained that the Georgia Department of Education has set up a process to collect certification responses from local school districts. As of now, no school district in Georgia has expressed a desire to reject signing the certification letter. However, it’s important to note that Atlanta Public Schools, the largest school district in the state, has not yet commented on whether it will comply with the directive.
The April 3 letter also follows a legal challenge filed by the National Education Association (NEA) and other groups against the Education Department’s efforts to ban DEI programs. The lawsuit challenges the department’s interpretation of federal law, arguing that DEI programs are not discriminatory but rather seek to promote equality and fairness.
The lawsuit specifically targets a “Dear Colleague” letter issued by the Education Department on February 14, which had previously warned that diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs could be perceived as discriminatory. The lawsuit claims that DEI programs frequently prefer certain racial groups, thus violating federal non-discrimination law.
This legal action was also influenced by the 2023 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard case, which effectively ended the practice of race-conscious admissions at universities. This ruling has had a broader impact on how federal law is interpreted regarding the treatment of race in educational settings. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in this case reflected a shift away from race-based policies in public institutions, further supporting the argument that DEI programs in K-12 schools could be unconstitutional.
In response to the lawsuit, the Education Department extended the deadline for schools to sign the certification letter until April 24. This extension was granted after U.S. District Court Judge Landya B. McCafferty ruled that the department must allow more time for schools to consider their stance on the matter. This extension provides school districts with additional time to review their policies and decide whether they will comply with the federal directive.
While the controversy over DEI programs continues to unfold, some cities and states have already decided not to sign the letter, and they are choosing to maintain their DEI programs despite the threat of losing federal funds. However, most of the states that have chosen to comply with the directive are led by Republican lawmakers. This reflects a broader trend in the political landscape, where Republican-controlled states have been more likely to follow the federal government’s stance on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs.
In Georgia, the push to remove DEI programs is not new. Prior to the Education Department’s directive, Republican state lawmakers had already attempted to advance legislation that would block state and federal funding to schools with diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs.
The bill, known as House Bill 127, was introduced earlier this year but failed to gain traction in the state legislature. Despite this setback, Republican lawmakers in Georgia are planning to reintroduce the measure next year, signaling that this issue is likely to remain a point of contention in the state’s political and educational debates.
The ongoing debate over DEI programs is part of a larger national conversation about how schools should address issues of race, equality, and inclusion. Proponents of DEI programs argue that such initiatives are necessary to ensure that all students, regardless of their background, have access to a fair and equal education. They believe that DEI programs help address historical inequities and provide students with the tools they need to navigate an increasingly diverse society.
On the other hand, critics argue that DEI programs can be divisive and may unfairly prioritise certain racial groups over others. They contend that such programs can perpetuate discrimination and promote a divisive view of race relations. The federal government’s stance on this issue has added fuel to the debate, with some states and school districts opting to remove DEI programs to avoid potential legal and financial repercussions.
As the situation continues to develop, it is clear that Georgia, along with other states, will face difficult decisions regarding how to balance federal directives with the needs of their local educational systems. The outcome of this debate will have significant implications for how schools approach issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion in the years to come.
Disclaimer: This article has been meticulously fact-checked by our team to ensure accuracy and uphold transparency. We strive to deliver trustworthy and dependable content to our readers.
