What counts as a D.E.I. program in a school? And how do such programs differ from simply learning and talking about race and identity?
Those questions have been central to local education debates over the past five years. Now, they are most likely to become even more pressing, after the Trump administration notified all 50 states on Thursday that public schools could lose federal funding if they engage in the use of D.E.I. to “advantage one’s race over another.”
The letter presents the clearest threat yet to the country’s largest source of federal funding for K-12 schools — Title I, which supports low-income students. (Federal dollars account for about 8 percent of total K-12 education funding.)
President Trump has previously pressured schools not to recognize transgender identities. The new directive focuses on the categories of race, color and national origin. The document sent to states cites Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which seeks to prevent discrimination, and the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision overturning affirmative action in college admissions.
The administration has not offered many examples of K-12 programs it considers illegal. But here are the types of initiatives that could come under scrutiny.
Single-Race Affinity Groups
Schools sometimes separate students by race, either to provide targeted support or in an attempt to foster more open discussions about race itself.
For example, some districts have convened support groups for Black boys, where issues around masculinity, achievement and relationships are discussed. Those groups sometimes also provide academic tutoring or help with college applications.
And some schools have separated all students by race into discussion groups — Asian students, white students, Latino students, multiracial students — in order to facilitate conversations around diversity and bias.
It seems clear that the Trump administration will not accept these practices. It has already begun investigating Ithaca Public Schools in New York for hosting a series of conferences for students of color, some of which may not have been open to white students.
“Segregation is illegal,” the administration declared in one explanatory document, defining segregation as any activity that “separates students, faculty or staff based on race.”
The document makes clear that it does not matter whether educators are separating students for “a putatively beneficent purpose.”
Black Studies and Ethnic Studies Courses
Over the past decade, many states, school districts and curriculum publishers created new coursework in Black studies and ethnic studies.
The Trump administration’s new guidelines do not explicitly discuss the K-12 curriculum. But in advising colleges, the administration previously stated that classes that “emphasize and focus on racial stereotypes” could “create a hostile environment under Title VI.”
Mr. Trump and his allies have argued in the past that discussions of structural racism and white privilege create a hostile environment for white students, by prompting unnecessary feelings of personal guilt. But the concept of structural racism is central to disciplines like Black studies and ethnic studies, which are increasingly taught in left-leaning states and districts.
Kimberlé Crenshaw, a leading Black studies and legal scholar, said the administration was reaching well beyond established legal precedents, and argued that schools should not rush to accept the administration’s interpretation that civil rights law allows curriculum restrictions.
She warned against what she called “anticipatory obedience — the idea we are going to give more than we are being asked to because we want to be safe.”
Programs to Boost Outcomes for Specific Groups
Some school districts have created written plans to increase test scores and graduation rates for specific groups of students, such as Black boys.
Those programs often seek to recruit a more diverse set of teachers, to better match student demographics — a hiring practice the Trump administration considers discriminatory. The plans may also mention goals like enrolling more nonwhite students in Advanced Placement courses or gifted programs.
In response to questions about whether such academic initiatives could be targeted, Craig Trainor, the acting assistant education secretary for civil rights, said in a statement, “This isn’t complicated.”
He pointed to previous administration guidance, which stated, “If an educational institution treats a person of one race differently than it treats another person because of that person’s race, the educational institution violates the law.”
Heritage Celebrations and Book Lists
Lots of schools commemorate events like Black History Month or the Lunar New Year, with special reading lists or performances. Some have after-school clubs formed to explore a certain identity.
In its F.A.Q. document for schools, the administration states that heritage groups and celebrations are not inherently problematic, “assuming they are open to all students regardless of race.”
But anti-D.E.I. laws and regulations have spurred some educators to self-censor.
In states like Florida with similar restrictions on D.E.I., schools have sometimes canceled heritage programming in anticipation of it being targeted by conservative lawmakers and activists, and removed library books that touch on Black historical figures or the civil rights movement.
In response to previous Trump executive actions, some Defense Department schools paused Hispanic and Asian heritage groups and canceled Black History Month assemblies and performances.
Is any of this enforceable?
There are 13,000 school districts nationwide, and it is unclear how effectively the Trump administration can police them. Mr. Trump has drastically cut the Education Department’s staff as he seeks to dismantle the agency, which includes many of the lawyers who investigate civil rights violations.
As he has done with universities, Mr. Trump might target high-profile, liberal school districts, such as those in the nation’s big cities.
The potential effects in those places could be enormous. Los Angeles, for example, received $861 million from the federal government this school year, and used the money to help pay the salaries of teachers, counselors, social workers and psychiatrists.