|
Welcome
Welcome to our third issue of The Academic Advisor for 2025.
In this edition, we cover the following topics of interest for schools, institutions of higher education, and other education-focused organizations:
- The latest efforts to close the U.S. Department of Education (ED);
- New guidance from ED on the scope of education records subject to parental access under FERPA and the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment;
- How stop-work orders on federal contracts are affecting higher education;
- Legislation to end diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) education in Ohio and West Virginia;
- The effects of declining enrollment and federal uncertainty in Pennsylvania;
-
How student athletes and the NCAA fared at the House settlement hearing;
- The prevalence of cybersecurity incidents at K-12 schools;
- How two West Virginia education unions are merging;
- The implications of federal education cuts and how states are responding; and
- Impending requirements for schools and postsecondary institutions’ compliance with the final rule implementing Title II of the ADA and federal DEI guidance.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
We are pleased to share that Spilman attorney David Amsbary has been elected President of the West Virginia State Bar. David is a Member in our Huntington office. He will bring his deep legal knowledge, leadership acumen, and commitment to professional excellence to this esteemed role. He is well-versed in healthcare law, labor and employment law, commercial transactions, and litigation. Please join us in congratulating David on this great honor!
In addition, Joseph A. “Jay” Ford, a Member attorney in our Charleston office, was named the 2024 “Young Lawyer of the Year” by the West Virginia State Bar. This prestigious honor recognizes Jay for his exceptional contributions to the legal profession and his leadership in the legal community.
UPCOMING EVENTS
Navigating Compliance, April 10, Pittsburgh, PA
We invite you to join our team of professionals from Spilman and CR Advisory in a discussion of how to assess institutional compliance weaknesses and then to develop and implement a strategic plan to address them. Click here to learn more and register.
2025 SuperVision Labor & Employment Symposium, May 30, Charleston, WV
We also invite you to join our full-day SuperVision Symposium, designed to enhance your confidence in navigating complex employment decisions, including those that affect educational institutions. This complimentary symposium is tailored for HR professionals, C-suite executives, business owners, and anyone who manages employees. Dive into a day of valuable insights on employment topics such as HR impacts from the new administration; employee relations; changes at the NLRB; free speech in the workplace and more. In addition, members of our Education Practice Group will be hosting a lunch table discussion on key issues educational institutions should be prepared to address under the new administration. Spend the day with us and leave armed with strategies and solutions! Click here to learn more and register.
As always, thank you for reading and let us know if you have any questions.
Erin Jones Adams, Member, Co-Chair of the Education Practice Group, and Co-Editor of The Academic Advisor
and
Kevin L. Carr, Member, Co-Chair of the Education Practice Group, Co-Chair of the Labor and Employment Practice Group, and Co-Editor of The Academic Advisor
| | |
“The directive comes on the heels of U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon’s decision to gut half the agency as its ‘final mission.’”
Why this is important: On March 20, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure” of the U.S. Department of Education (ED). This Order followed repeated calls by President Trump for the elimination of ED throughout his campaign and multiple times since being sworn into office. Prior to the Order, the administration had already cut the ED workforce in half by reducing staff in civil rights enforcement offices and eliminating most employees working for the National Center for Education Statistics. In a speech while signing the Order, President Trump stated that “[a]fter 45 years, the United States spends more in education by far than any other country, and spends, likewise, by far, more per pupil than any country…yet we rank near the bottom of the list in terms of success.”
While the administration may fire ED employees and allocate its responsibilities to other departments, the elimination of ED would require congressional approval, including 60 senators to approve. Currently, Republicans have a 53-47 majority in the Senate.
ED is responsible for many programs key to school and college operations. This includes civil rights investigations, Title IX and Title I regulations and enforcement, financial aid, and others. President Trump has indicated that these core functions will be “preserved in full and redistributed to various other agencies and departments that will take very good care of them.” It is unclear at this time which departments would be taking on new roles. --- Isaiah C. Robinson
| | |
“Withholding information such as a student’s gender transition violates parents’ rights and could result in lost funding for schools, the education secretary said.”
Why this is important: As educational institutions continue to experience, the Trump administration has many priorities for and affecting education in its second term. One such priority concerns the treatment of “sex” by the federal government as limited to the male and female binary per the January 20, 2025, executive order titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” which states that “sex” does not include the concept of “gender identity” and promises to use “clear and accurate language and policies that recognize women are biologically women, and men are biologically male.”
In keeping with this executive order, Secretary of Education Linda McMahon issued a new “Dear Educators” letter and attached guidance document (DEL) for states and school districts on March 28, 2025, that prevents teachers and administrators from concealing “critical information in student records from their parents[,]” including information about students’ gender transitions. Secretary McMahon has relied upon the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA) to mandate compliance with this initiative.
FERPA is a federal law that protects “education records,” which are generally defined as records directly related to the student and maintained by an educational institution or party acting on its behalf. Under FERPA, an “educational institution” generally means a school district, a public elementary or secondary school, or an institution of postsecondary education such as a college or university. FERPA applies to any such schools that receive funding under a program administered by the U.S. Department of Education (ED). FERPA affords parents certain rights to inspect and review the education records of their children and to seek amendment or correction to education records that parents believe are inaccurate, misleading, or a violation of the right to privacy. When a student reaches 18 years of age or attends a college or university at any age, the student becomes an “eligible student” under FERPA and all FERPA rights transfer from the parent to the student.
The PPRA similarly applies to programs and activities that receive funding from ED, and it governs the administration of surveys, analyses, and evaluations to students that concern various protected areas, including mental or psychological problems involving the student or their family and sex behavior or attitudes, as well as parental access to information. Like FERPA, PPRA rights transfer from a parent to a student once the student reaches 18.
As this article highlights, the DEL takes aim at “ideological indoctrination” in the form of gender support plans that enable students to modify how their name, pronouns, and access to school facilities will be treated by schools without parental involvement. According to the DEL, some schools characterize gender support plans as not part of students’ education records and thus inaccessible to parents. The DEL contends that any such plans are part of students’ education records and, therefore, must be available to parents upon their request. (The DEL further prohibits schools from withholding information from parents that identifies other students who have made death threats against their children, and by April 30, 2025, also requires state educational agencies (SEAs) submit to the Student Privacy Policy Office assurances that SEAs and their respective local educational agencies are complying with FERPA and the PPRA.)
Contemporaneously with this guidance, ED also announced investigations of both the California and Maine Departments of Education for alleged violations of FERPA through their districts’ policies on gender support plans. These actions follow the December 2024 refusal by the U.S. Supreme Court to hear a Wisconsin school district case under which parents failed at challenging schools’ usage of gender support plans on constitutional grounds.
The bottom line: Schools with gender support plans that are subject to the DEL and to parental requests for access to FERPA-covered education records should work closely with their legal counsel to ensure compliance with this latest guidance from ED. As the DEL makes clear, ongoing receipt of federal financial assistance hangs in the balance for schools that refuse to comply. --- Erin Jones Adams
| | |
“The Trump administration pulled research funding over the president’s rule on transgender athletes — even though the university says it is complying.”
Why this is important: The University of Pennsylvania (Penn) announced that seven of its schools received federal stop-work orders on $175 million worth of research contracts, matching the amount of funding suspended by the Trump administration over the University’s transgender athletics policies. The freeze comes after President Trump’s February executive order banning transgender women from participating in sports aligned with their gender identity.
The U.S. Department of Education launched a Title IX investigation into Penn the day after the order. Penn has maintained that its policies have complied with both NCAA rules and existing laws at all times, and University President Larry Jameson pledged to defend that position.
The move mirrors a brief federal funding halt imposed on the University of Maine System (UMS) by the USDA, which was later reversed following political discussions and acknowledgment of compliance with updated NCAA regulations.
The affected Penn research involves critical areas such as infectious disease prevention, quantum computing, and chemical warfare defense. Jameson noted additional grant cancellations and delays are also occurring, and the University is working to address them.
Separately, Penn’s health system announced 300 job cuts due to organizational restructuring, which officials said are unrelated to the federal funding freeze. --- Shane P. Riley
| | |
“S.B. 1 will set rules around classroom discussion, create post-tenure reviews, put diversity scholarships at risk, create a retrenchment provision that block unions from negotiating on tenure, shorten university board of trustees terms from nine years down to six years, and require students take an American history course, among other things.”
Why this is important: On March 28, 2025, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine signed into law an education overhaul banning diversity efforts, regulating classroom discussion, and prohibiting faculty strikes. Most of the changes are scheduled to take effect 90 days after his signature. Senate Bill 1 only affects Ohio’s public universities and colleges.
If the public universities and colleges do not abide by the new law, they risk losing state funding. While there are many changes, those likely to have the most impact include:
- No training, offices or scholarships based on diversity, equity and inclusion. (However, Ohio State University has said that its Morrill Scholarship, which includes being actively engaged in diversity-based leadership and social justice activities, will continue.)
- A ban on faculty strikes and a retrenchment provision blocking unions from negotiating tenure.
- Tenured professors could be fired over poor reviews. Students and peers would weigh in on professors' performance, and poor evaluations could result in discipline or firing.
- Public universities and colleges cannot take positions on “controversial beliefs or policies,” which are defined as anything subject to political controversy, including climate change, electoral politics, foreign policy, DEI programs, immigration policy, marriage, and abortion. This could impact diversity scholarships.
- Elimination of undergraduate degrees if fewer than five students obtain degrees over three years.
- A ban on donations from and partnerships with the Chinese government.
- A requirement that students take an American history course.
- A requirement that faculty post syllabi online starting with the 2026-2027 school year.
- A reduction in the tenure of university trustees, who are political appointees who oversee universities, from nine to six years. (Ohio State University's student trustees may no longer vote on issues.)
This Bill received overwhelming opposition from college students and faculty members, some of whom said they would leave Ohio if it passed. Over 1,500 people submitted opponent testimony against the Bill. Backers of the Bill say it is needed to prevent liberal "woke" indoctrination in Ohio's public universities and colleges. Sen. Jerry Cirino called the new law "monumentally significant legislation that will allow Ohio’s public universities and community colleges to deal with looming enrollment challenges and usher in a renaissance of academic excellence." Opponents have raised legal concerns about whether the Bill violates the First Amendment's right to free speech, whether its language is too vague to be implemented effectively, and whether eliminating DEI scholarships would harm individuals who currently benefit from them.
Although Ohioans have the option to put laws passed by legislators to a vote, they must collect 248,092 signatures or 6 percent of the last governor's race total to get the issue on the ballot. This is a massive undertaking, which makes it unlikely to occur. Opponents can file legal challenges to all or portions of the Bill. However, legal challenges take time and while those challenges are pending unless or until a court enters an order otherwise, public universities and colleges will need to start immediate work on ensuring their policies are compliant with the Bill. --- Lisa M. Hawrot
| | |
“This legislation now heads across the hall to the House of Delegates for approval.”
Why this is important: The 2025 West Virginia legislative session may be close to ending, but that does not mean there is not time for the Legislature to pass more bills. On March 26, 2025, a heated debate occurred on the Senate floor over various bills concerning education.
Senate Bill 474 calls for the ending of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs in West Virginia schools. Senator Joey Garcia of Marion County rose in opposition of the Bill, explaining the importance and appreciation of different viewpoints. Senator Garcia stated, “opportunities have not always been there for everyone… I do not think racism is over. I do not think sexism is a thing of the past. I think these are things we constantly need to remind ourselves there is still work to do, and I think [this Bill] puts us a step back.” Offering his support for passage of the Bill, Senator Scott Fuller of Wayne County said DEI was not needed anymore, adding that he did not “know where this came from…this narrative that we are a systemically racist country.” Senator Patricia Rucker from Jefferson County also offered her support, stating, “[t]his [B]ill is about ending discrimination.” The Bill ultimately passed by a vote of 32-2.
Senate Bill 705 also received debate on the floor. The Bill would require the West Virginia Board of Education to submit rules to the Legislature for approval. West Virginia voters rejected a ballot amendment in 2022 on the same issue. Senator Garcia spoke in opposition, saying, “[t]his is blatantly unconstitutional legislation… The [West Virginia Supreme Court] has decided this issue.” Senator Eric Tarr of Putnam County disagreed with Senator Garcia, arguing “[t]here was absolute confusion amongst the voters” when discussing the ballot amendment. Senator Tarr added that “[t]he [West Virginia Supreme Court] misinterpreted [the amendments] twice.” Senate Bill 705 passed by a vote of 19-15.
Both bills will now go to the House of Delegates. One bill in particular received bipartisan support. Senate Bill 54, requiring age-appropriate instruction on the Holocaust, unanimously passed the Senate. --- Isaiah C. Robinson
| | |
“The committee is undertaking consideration of a 6.5% requested increase in funding for the upcoming budget, a figure they say would enable them to keep student costs down.”
Why this is important: Pennsylvania's legislative appropriations hearings kicked off this week, focusing on funding for higher education through the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education (PASSHE) and the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency (PHEAA). PASSHE is requesting a 6.5 percent funding increase to maintain tuition rates, which have been frozen since 2018. Chancellor Chris Fiorentino argued that this freeze, despite inflation, has made education more affordable and financially predictable for students, though enrollment continues to decline.
Recent university consolidations and plans for shared academic offerings across campuses were discussed as ways to streamline costs and improve sustainability. Lawmakers questioned the need for increased funding amid shrinking student populations, but Fiorentino emphasized the long-term value of investment, noting strong in-state job placement for graduates.
The discussion turned contentious over diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs. Some Republican senators, citing Trump administration policies, questioned DEI initiatives and requested transparency around DEI staffing, while Democratic senators defended the programs as essential to broadening access and addressing historical inequalities.
PHEAA President James Steeley highlighted the agency’s role in administering educational grants, including the new "Grow PA" scholarship offering up to $5,000 for students in high-demand fields. While progress is being made on state-funded aid, uncertainty remains around federal student loan policies.
Overall, the hearings underscored a push to modernize Pennsylvania's higher education system while balancing fiscal responsibility, equity, and workforce needs. --- Shane P. Riley
| | |
“On Monday, a judge in California conducted a hearing on final approval of a settlement that would reshape college sports.”
Why this is important: The proposed settlement of three athlete-compensation antitrust cases (commonly referred to as the “House settlement”) was teed up for final review; the deadline for objections had lapsed; and it was up to Judge Claudia Wilken of the Northern District of California to determine whether $2.8 billion in damage distributions to athletes over 10 years, plus the ability for Division I schools to begin paying athletes directly for their name, image, and likeness (NIL) subject to certain caps, would be approved at the April 7, 2025 hearing. The outcome: while not back to the drawing board, Judge Wilken has instructed the parties to “see what [they] can do about all these issues” raised during the hearing. (For additional background, please see earlier articles on this topic in The Academic Advisor from January and March.)
As this article highlights, some of the concerns Judge Wilken identified include the team-by-team roster limits that would go into effect upon settlement, appearing to want them phased in to avoid athletes’ immediate loss of roster spots; the manner in which the arrangement binds future athletes to its terms notwithstanding their ability to raise objections in court; and the justification for subjecting certain NIL deals with entities other than schools to a review process assessing their legitimacy within the marketplace. For the plaintiff athletes who argued that ongoing challenges to the settlement based on roster limits, Title IX, and other objections suffered “fatal defects,” mostly “rehash[ed]” earlier claims, and should not impair its approval, the hearing was no doubt a major disappointment. While this article provides a full recap of the hearing highlights, the key takeaway is that the parties will “need to do some redrafting” in order to “fix everything” Judge Wilken identified before the settlement receives her blessing.
Spilman attorneys will continue to review and share updates regarding this historic settlement proposal and its effects on college athletics. --- Erin Jones Adams
| | |
“Cybercriminals are increasingly targeting school networks through phishing and social engineering, a cybersecurity nonprofit reported.”
Why this is important: K-12 schools remain vulnerable to cyberattacks throughout the country. In the 18 months between July 2023 and December 2024, there were 9,300 cyberattacks against 5,000 schools. Beyond the theft of data, cyberattacks on K-12 schools cause a significant disruption of critical services. With attempts to thwart cyberattacks, criminals are using a new tactic of focusing attacks on the people using the schools’ networks through phishing attacks and social engineering, thereby tricking people into divulging log-in information. These attacks are increasing and successful because school districts lack sufficient funding and manpower to adequately address these threats. To assist school districts in protecting themselves against these attacks, the non-profit Center for Internet Security created the Multi-State Information Sharing and Analysis Center to work with schools and other government organizations to protect their computer networks. The federal government has also allocated funding to assist local school districts to fortify their computer networks. Individual state governments are also assisting local school districts, with 16 states having introduced K-12 cybersecurity bills. It will take a wholistic approach to address this ever-increasing problem, but school districts must prioritize cybersecurity. --- Alexander L. Turner
| | |
“'It’s the first merger in the NEA and AFT in the world of non bargaining states and deep red states. So it is very historic day for us.’”
Why this is important: A plan that has been in the works since 2018 finally came to fruition on March 31, 2025, when the two teachers’ unions in West Virginia—the NEA and AFT-WV—voted to merge. The new union will be called Education West Virginia. The new organization officially starts on September 1, 2025. Kristie Skidmore, President of AFT-WV since November 2024, said, “[n]ow we are together… We’re stronger, we’re bigger, we’re better than before.” Dale Lee, President of the West Virginia Education Association, added that “[i]t made more sense for us with the many commonalities that we had to address these attacks on public education and just be a stronger unified voice for public education, for our employees, for our educators and our students.”
Both organizations have historically competed against each other. Now, both Lee and Skidmore acknowledge they will be stronger with one voice. Challenges for the new Education West Virginia are on the horizon, however. For example, the new union’s stance on the Hope Scholarship will be an uphill battle. Proponents of the Hope Scholarship believe it offers West Virginia families more options to educate their children. Others, however, say it will draw resources away from public education. With the Hope Scholarship costing the state government upwards of $100 million, Education West Virginia will likely be concerned about where the money will come from. Additionally, more than half of West Virginia schools are Title I schools. With the planned dissolution of the U.S. Department of Education, there are concerns about where the funding for West Virginia schools will come from. --- Isaiah C. Robinson
| | Federal Education Cuts Prompt Mixed State Responses to Uncertain Future | | |
By Hikmat N. Al-Chami
The U.S. Department of Education (ED) provides billions in annual funding to state schools, particularly serving low-income students, children with disabilities, and special education programs. If eliminated, states would need to find alternative funding sources or face difficult decisions about which educational services to maintain or cut.
Financial Ramifications
The financial implications of dismantling ED are substantial. According to financial analyst Michael McTague, ED oversees approximately $126 billion in federal Title IV financial aid for 2024, including $38 billion in Pell Grants and $86 billion in student loans. This massive funding stream is unlikely to be eliminated, but would likely be transferred to the Treasury Department or another federal agency.
"For many, this is the primary role of [ED]," McTague notes. "Numerous families and students depend on this system to provide a make-or-break factor in whether to attend college."
Beyond financial aid, McTague points out that any significant reduction in federal education funding could create a major shakeup in higher education, potentially benefiting mid-tier colleges that "lack the swagger of the top schools and are much more expensive than community colleges."
State-by-State Reactions
South Carolina officials are divided on the potential impacts. Governor Henry McMaster's office supports "returning education to those who know their students and communities," while State Superintendent Ellen Weaver promises to protect funding for low-income and special needs students.
Meanwhile, South Carolina Education Association President Sherry East warns of potential staff shortages and increased class sizes if federal funding disappears.
Virginia state Senator Schuyler VanValkenburg, who also teaches in Henrico County, warned that the effects would disproportionately harm vulnerable communities and localities with the least amount of resources.
When asked about the federal changes, Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin's office released a statement saying the Governor "supports President Trump's efforts to provide states more control over educational outcomes," though he did not directly address whether he supports eliminating ED.
North Carolina state education superintendent Maurice "Mo" Green expressed concern about the lack of clarity. "We have no idea what dismantle means," he said, noting that North Carolina receives approximately $1.5 billion annually from ED.
In West Virginia, where federal funds accounted for about 10 percent of pre-pandemic education budgets, education policy researcher Tamaya Browder told local media that federal money plays "a small but incredibly meaningful role when it comes to equity."
Ohio
Ohio Governor Mike DeWine expressed "cautious optimism" after attending the executive order signing. "The most important thing is for some of the bureaucracy to be eliminated so that dollars from the federal government can be more effectively utilized in Ohio," DeWine said. With Ohio receiving $1.5 billion annually from ED, DeWine promised to prioritize Title I and special education funding. Meanwhile, parents remain concerned about access to Pell Grants.
Pennsylvania
Aaron Chapin, President of the Pennsylvania State Education Association, warns that Pennsylvania faces the potential loss of $1.6 billion in annual federal education funding that currently supports Title I programs and special education services across the state. "Today's executive order has put $1.6 billion in funding for Pennsylvania's public schools at risk," said Chapin.
Technical Challenges Emerging
The National Education Statistics Center, which ED operates, has already been dramatically reduced from more than 100 employees to just three, according to Chase Meyer, a political science professor at the University of South Carolina. "If you were a school that got that money before... getting someone to answer the phone is going to be impossible," Meyer said in reference to anticipated logistical challenges.
As the battle over ED’s future moves to both the courts and Congress, America’s educational landscape stands at a crossroads. With $2.4 billion in Virginia education funding alone at stake, and similar amounts across all 50 states, the outcome will determine not just administrative structures but the fundamental resources available to students during a period of economic uncertainty. Whatever path emerges, schools will need to navigate a complex transition period while ensuring that essential services remain intact for the millions of students who depend on them.
| | Final Rule for Title II of the ADA | | |
By Sophia L. Hines
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) has long been a beacon of bipartisan legislation and efforts to make opportunities and spaces in America accessible to citizens with disabilities. The ADA prohibits discrimination by certain entities against qualified individuals with a disability, and it further requires facilities to ensure that such individuals are able to participate in certain areas of public life, employment opportunities, higher education, and receive some services provided by private entities.
On April 24, 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued its final rule updating the implementing regulations for Title II of the ADA. The final rule has specific requirements for ensuring that web content and mobile applications (apps) are accessible to people with disabilities in subpart H to Title II of the ADA (28 CFR part 35). In particular, the DOJ is adopting the technical standards of Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 Level AA, which define 50 success criteria to make websites and mobile applications accessible for people with disabilities. While the final rule contains a few exceptions, overall, a public entity (other than a special district government) with a total population of 50,000 or more must comply with the rule by April 24, 2026. A public entity with a total population of less than 50,000 or any public entity that is a special district government must comply with the rule by April 26, 2027. Public entities covered under Title II range from state and local government agencies to public schools, community colleges, and public universities regardless of whether they receive federal funding.
In addition to the modernization of web content required for most public entities, those that receive funding from the federal government must also comply with the recent court rulings and executive orders affecting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). On January 21, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order 14173 “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity.” Section 4 of the Order encourages the private sector to end “Illegal DEI Discrimination and Preferences.” Section 5 calls for the Attorney General and the Secretary of Education to jointly issue guidance to all state and local educational agencies that receive federal funds, as well as all institutions of higher education that receive federal grants or participate in the federal student loan assistance program under Title IV of the Higher Education Act, 20 U.S.C. 1070 et seq., regarding the measures and practices required to comply with Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, 600 U.S. 181 (2023).
On February 14, 2025, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) Office of Civil Rights released a Dear Colleague letter with further guidance on these points (DCL). According to the DCL, “all educational institutions are advised to: (1) ensure that their policies and actions comply with existing civil rights law; (2) cease all efforts to circumvent prohibitions on the use of race by relying on proxies or other indirect means to accomplish such ends; and (3) cease all reliance on third-party contractors, clearinghouses, or aggregators that are being used by institutions in an effort to circumvent prohibited uses of race. Institutions that fail to comply with federal civil rights law may, consistent with applicable law, face potential loss of federal funding.” On March 19, 2025, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and DOJ released a joint one-page technical assistance document entitled “What to Do If You Experience Discrimination Related to DEI at Work,” which provides examples of “DEI-related discrimination” under Title VII and directs employees who “suspect they have experienced DEI-related discrimination” to “contact the EEOC promptly.”
The threat of cessation of federal funding to private and public universities and schools is coming from multiple angles, whether from ADA noncompliance or ongoing DEI programs. More changes are likely to impact funding and the landscape of higher education in the United States in the coming months.
| | |
If you would like to subscribe to this newsletter or know someone who would, please email us with contact information and THE ACADEMIC ADVISOR in the subject line. We will be glad to add you or your acquaintance to the email list.
If you have any education law questions or would like to learn more about topics covered in this newsletter, please feel free to contact us.
| | |
This is an attorney advertisement. Your receipt and/or use of this material does not constitute or create an attorney-client relationship between you and Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC or any attorney associated with the firm. This e-mail publication is distributed with the understanding that the author, publisher and distributor are not rendering legal or other professional advice on specific facts or matters and, accordingly, assume no liability whatsoever in connection with its use.
Responsible Attorney: Michael J. Basile, 800-967-8251
| | | | |
