Education
Judge Blocks Education Officials From Providing Sensitive Data to Musk’s Team

A federal judge in Maryland granted a preliminary injunction on Monday barring top officials at the Education Department and the Office of Personnel Management from turning over sensitive data to Elon Musk and members of his Department of Government Efficiency team while a privacy lawsuit continues.
The order was the latest development in a category of lawsuits that have taken aim at Mr. Musk’s access to federal databases containing personal information about U.S. citizens. The suits have largely succeeded thus far in securing rulings blocking Mr. Musk’s team from that type of data.
In an opinion accompanying the order on Monday, Judge Deborah L. Boardman of the Federal District Court for the District of Maryland wrote that the Privacy Act of 1974 clearly required stronger protection of personal and financial data that could be vacuumed up in Mr. Musk’s efforts to scour agency records.
The American Federation of Teachers had sued to halt those efforts, saying that its members routinely submitted sensitive data to the department for help with student loan forgiveness and other programs, and had not consented to their data being scrutinized by Mr. Musk’s team, which despite its name is not an executive-branch department. Judge Boardman issued a restraining order last month and extended it on Monday, citing Congress’s reasoning when it passed the Privacy Act more than 50 years ago.
“Those concerns are just as salient today,” she wrote. “No matter how important or urgent the President’s DOGE agenda may be, federal agencies must execute it in accordance with the law. That likely did not happen in this case.”
Federal judges in a number of cases have been sympathetic to arguments that Mr. Musk’s sweep through federal data systems have come at the expense of ordinary people who handed their financial records and personal details over to the government for routine services.
Last week, a judge ordered the Social Security Administration to ensure that any data given to Mr. Musk’s team was anonymized or redacted first. And last month, a judge in a another case took similar steps to protect taxpayer information stored at the Treasury Department.
Lawyers behind those various challenges have argued that the injunctions are increasingly urgent, especially in light of fears that data submitted by private citizens could be used for other purposes beyond a routine audit, including identifying and targeting undocumented immigrants for deportation. Over the weekend, a draft report of a deal between the Internal Revenue Service and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement office indicated that the Trump administration was already moving to use data for that purpose, even without Mr. Musk’s team serving as a go-between.
Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, said in a statement on Monday that Mr. Musk and his team “have been running roughshod over Americans’ privacy.” The judge, she said, had acted to maintain a firewall between those efforts and the data of tens of millions of people held by the Education Department.
In her ruling, Judge Boardman reiterated that the union appeared likely to prevail in the case. But as in other cases, the rapid pace at which the Trump administration has moved to dismantle agencies and outrun the courts could limit some of the practical effects of the order.
Already this month, top officials at the Education Department rushed to cut the agency’s work force in half. And an executive order President Trump signed last week directed the agency’s leaders to find ways to spin off some of its functions, potentially moving some of the databases at issue in the lawsuit to other departments, such as the Small Business Administration or the Department of Health and Human Services.

Education
Opinion | The Jewish Students Caught Up in Trump’s Antisemitism Crackdown

Given these figures, it’s not surprising that Jews have taken a leading role in the protests against Israel’s assault on Gaza. Eleven days after Oct. 7, 2023, progressive and anti-Zionist Jewish groups, including Jewish Voice for Peace, gathered roughly 400 protesters, many wearing shirts that said “Not in Our Name,” and occupied a congressional building. Later that month, Jewish Voice for Peace and its allies led a takeover of New York’s Grand Central Terminal. At Brown University, the first sit-in demanding divestment from companies affiliated with Israel comprised solely Jewish students.
Jewish students are not generally as vulnerable as their Palestinian, Arab, Muslim, Black and noncitizen counterparts, but it is precisely this assumption of greater safety that may have made them more willing to protest in the first place. And many have paid a price. It’s impossible to know what percentage of the students punished for pro-Palestinian activism have been Jewish, since university disciplinary proceedings are often secret. But anecdotal evidence suggests it is significant. And regardless of one’s views about how universities should treat campus activism, there is something bizarre about repressing it in the name of Jewish safety when a number of the students being repressed are Jews.
Since Oct. 7, at least four universities have temporarily suspended or placed on probation their chapters of Jewish Voice for Peace. In 2023 at BrownU Jews for Ceasefire Now protests, 20 members were arrested. (The charges were dropped.) At a pro-Israel event at Rockland Community College at the State University of New York on Oct. 12, 2023, a Jewish student who briefly shouted “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” and “Jews for Palestine” was reportedly suspended for the rest of the academic year. In May 2024, a Jewish tenured professor in anthropology at Muhlenberg College said she was fired after she reposted an Instagram post that declared, in part: “Do not cower to Zionists. Shame them. Do not welcome them in your spaces. Do not make them feel comfortable.” In September, Michigan’s attorney general brought felony charges for resisting or obstructing a police officer, as well as misdemeanor trespassing charges, against three Jewish activists — as well as four others — for offenses related to a Gaza solidarity encampment at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. (They all pleaded not guilty).
Even when protest has taken the form of Jewish religious observance, it often has been shut down. Last fall, when Jewish students opposing the war during the holiday of Sukkot built Gaza solidarity sukkahs, temporary boothlike structures in which Jews eat, learn and sleep during the holiday, at least eight universities forcibly dismantled them, or required the students to do so, or canceled approval for their construction. (The universities said that the groups were not allowed to erect structures on campus.)
Despite this, establishment Jewish pro-Israel organizations have applauded universities that have cracked down on pro-Palestinian protest. When Columbia suspended its branch of Jewish Voice for Peace alongside Students for Justice in Palestine, the A.D.L. congratulated the university for fulfilling its “legal & moral obligations to protect Jewish students.” After New Hampshire police broke up Dartmouth’s Gaza solidarity encampment, the A.D.L. thanked the college’s president for “protecting all students’ right to learn in a safe environment.” But the experience was hardly safe for Annelise Orleck, the former chair of the school’s Jewish studies program, who said she was zip-tied, body-slammed and forcibly dragged by police officers when they moved in. After the state attorney general announced that she would bring charges against demonstrators at the University of Michigan’s encampment who had allegedly violated the law, an official at the Jewish Federation of Greater Ann Arbor praised her for acting “courageously.” The A.D.L. has since reversed its prior support for the Trump administration’s detention of pro-Palestinian activists. But it still wants universities to impose tough restrictions on campus protest. When I reached out to the organization asking if it had a position on Jewish students getting swept up in campus crackdowns, representatives referred me to Mr. Greenblatt’s recent opinion essays. Each one reiterated the need to fight against what it deems campus antisemitism, but also advocated due process for all those involved.
Education
Trump Administration Opens Civil Rights Inquiry Into a Long Island Mascot Fight

Federal education officials said on Friday that they had opened a civil rights inquiry into whether New York State could withhold state money from a Long Island school district that has refused to follow a state requirement and drop its Native American mascot.
The announcement came shortly after President Trump expressed his support for the district, in Massapequa, N.Y., in its fight against complying with a state Board of Regents requirement that all districts abandon mascots that appropriate Native American culture or risk losing state funding.
The Massapequa district, whose “Chiefs” logo depicts an illustrated side profile of a Native American man in a feathered headdress, is one of several that have resisted making a change.
The name of the town, a middle-class swath of the South Shore where most residents voted for Mr. Trump in the November election, was derived from the Native American word “Marspeag” or “Mashpeag,” which means “great water land.”
In announcing the investigation, Linda McMahon, the education secretary, said that her department would “not stand by as the state of New York attempts to rewrite history and deny the town of Massapequa the right to celebrate its heritage in its schools.”
JP O’Hare, a spokesman for the state Education Department, said in a statement that state education officials had not been contacted by the federal government about the matter.
“However,” he added, “the U.S. Department of Education’s attempt to interfere with a state law concerning school district mascots is inconsistent with Secretary McMahon’s March 20, 2025, statement that she is ‘sending education back to the states, where it so rightly belongs.’”
The policy, introduced in 2022, was adopted amid a national push to change Native American mascot names or iconography through legislation and other moves.
When the ban was adopted, about five dozen New York school districts still used Native American-inspired mascots and logos. Districts were given until the end of June this year to eliminate banned mascots.
Since taking office for his second term, Mr. Trump and his administration have waged a relentless campaign against what they argue are illegal diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives and have threatened entities that do not fall in line and eliminate such efforts.
The president has said he would slash funding for low-income students in states that fail to do away with such programs. New York’s Education Department was the first to publicly refuse to comply with the order.
Massapequa school leaders filed a federal lawsuit seeking to keep the “Chiefs” name, but the judge in the case recently moved closer to dismissing it after finding they had failed to provide sufficient evidence for their claims, including that the mascot qualified as protected speech.
In a social media post this week, Mr. Trump criticized New York’s policy and called for Ms. McMahon to intervene.
“Forcing them to change the name, after all of these years, is ridiculous and, in actuality, an affront to our great Indian population,” the president wrote.
In a statement included in the federal Education Department’s announcement, Kerry Watcher, the Massapequa Board of Education president, welcomed the investigation.
“Attempts to erase Native American imagery do not advance learning,” Ms. Watcher said. “They distract from our core mission of providing a high-quality education grounded in respect, history and community values.”
Education
19 States Sue the Trump Administration Over Its D.E.I. Demand in Schools

A coalition of 19 states sued the Trump administration on Friday over its threat to withhold federal funding from states and districts with certain diversity programs in their public schools.
The lawsuit was filed in federal court by the attorneys general in California, New York, Illinois, Minnesota and other Democratic-leaning states, who argue that the Trump administration’s demand is illegal.
The lawsuit centers on an April 3 memo the Trump administration sent to states, requiring them to certify that they do not use certain diversity, equity and inclusion programs that the administration has said are illegal.
States that did not certify risked losing federal funding for low-income students.
Rob Bonta, the California attorney general, said at a news conference on Friday that the Trump administration had distorted federal civil rights law to force states to abandon legal diversity programs.
“California hasn’t and won’t capitulate. Our sister states won’t capitulate,” Mr. Bonta said, adding that the Trump administration’s D.E.I. order was vague and impractical to enforce, and that D.E.I. programs are “entirely legal” under civil rights law.
The Trump administration did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Friday evening.
The administration has argued that certain diversity programs in schools violate federal civil rights law, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color and national origin in programs that receive federal funding.
It has based its argument on the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling ending the use of race in college admissions, arguing that the decision applies to the use of race in education more broadly.
The administration has not offered a specific list of D.E.I. initiatives it deems illegal. But it has suggested that efforts to provide targeted academic support or counseling to specific groups of students amount to illegal segregation. And it has argued that lessons on concepts such as white privilege or structural racism, which posits that racism is embedded in social institutions, are discriminatory.
The lawsuit came a day after the Trump administration was ordered to pause any enforcement of its April 3 memo, in separate federal lawsuits brought by teachers’ unions and the N.A.A.C.P., among others.
Mr. Bonta said that the lawsuit by the 19 states brought forward separate claims and represented the “strong and unique interest” of states to ensure that billions of federal dollars appropriated by Congress reach students.
“We have different claims that we think are very strong claims,” he said.
Loss of federal funding would be catastrophic for students, said Letitia James, the attorney general of New York, an adversary of President Trump who previously won a civil fraud case against him.
She noted that school districts in Buffalo and Rochester rely on federal funds for nearly 20 percent of their revenue and said she was suing to “uphold our nation’s civil rights laws and protect our schools and the students who rely on them.”
-
Politics1 week ago
Video: Hegseth Attacks the Media Amid New Signal Controversy
-
News1 week ago
Harvard would be smart to follow Hillsdale’s playbook. Trump should avoid Biden’s. | Opinion
-
Culture6 days ago
New Poetry Books That Lean Into Calm and Joy Amid Life’s Chaos
-
News1 week ago
Maps: Where Do Federal Employees Work in America?
-
Technology1 week ago
Pete Hegseth reportedly spilled Yemen attack details in another Signal chat
-
Politics1 week ago
Pope Francis and US presidents: A look back at his legacy with the nation's leaders
-
World1 week ago
New Zealand’s minor gov’t party pushes to define women by biological sex
-
Politics1 week ago
JD Vance has ‘exchange of opinions’ on issues like deportations during meeting with top Vatican official