In a divided 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court handed a temporary but significant win to the Trump administration on Friday, allowing officials to continue blocking $65 million in federal teacher development grants while legal challenges proceed.
The emergency ruling lifts a lower court’s order that had forced the Education Department to resume the grants in eight Democratic-led states that are suing the administration over what they say is an illegal and politically motivated freeze.
At the heart of the dispute are two federal programs aimed at addressing the nationwide teacher shortage and improving educator preparation: the Teacher Quality Partnership Program and the Supporting Effective Educator Development Program. The Biden-era grants were halted in February as part of the Trump administration’s wider effort to dismantle federal diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives—an agenda now being carried out by Education Secretary Linda McMahon.
The conservative majority on the court—minus Chief Justice John Roberts—sided with the administration, asserting in an unsigned opinion that the states could recover the funds later if they ultimately prevail.
“Respondents have represented in this litigation that they have the financial wherewithal to keep their programs running,” the majority wrote. “So, if respondents ultimately prevail, they can recover any wrongfully withheld funds through suit in an appropriate forum.”
The order is not a final ruling on the merits of the case, but it effectively pauses a March 10 decision by U.S. District Judge Myong Joun in Boston. Joun, an Obama appointee, had issued a temporary restraining order requiring the administration to restart the grants while the case plays out. That decision was upheld by a panel of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals before being overturned by the high court’s emergency ruling.
Liberal Justices Criticize Court’s Intervention
The court's three liberal justices—Justices Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Sonia Sotomayor—issued strong dissents, sharply criticizing the majority for intervening prematurely in what they described as a fast-moving but ordinary legal dispute.
In a brief solo dissent, Justice Kagan warned against hasty decision-making in emergency cases: “The risk of error increases when this Court decides cases—as here—with barebones briefing, no argument, and scarce time for reflection.”
Justice Jackson, joined by Sotomayor, went further, calling the Court’s intervention “unprincipled and unfortunate.”
“It is also entirely unwarranted,” she wrote in a lengthy dissent. “The Government has not bothered to press any argument that the Department’s harm‐causing conduct is lawful.”
Administration Ramps Up Attacks on DEI
The ruling comes amid the Trump administration’s escalating efforts to scale back or eliminate federal programs and policies viewed as promoting DEI, a cornerstone of the previous administration’s approach to equity in education and the workforce.
In its emergency appeal, the Justice Department argued that allowing the grants to go forward would infringe on executive authority, calling the lower court rulings a form of “judicial arrogation” that could cause “irreparable constitutional harm.”
The coalition of states challenging the freeze—led by California and including Massachusetts, New Jersey, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, New York, and Wisconsin—argue that the administration lacks the legal authority to cancel grant disbursements already approved by Congress.
“The district court acted appropriately in granting a narrow and time-limited restraining order while it proceeds to a prompt ruling on the motion for a preliminary injunction,” the states said in their filing.
More Legal Battles Ahead
The case now returns to Judge Joun’s courtroom, where a hearing was held last week on whether to issue a longer-term injunction. However, the Supreme Court’s majority cast doubt on whether the trial judge even has jurisdiction to continue, suggesting the states’ lawsuit could ultimately be dismissed on procedural grounds.
The teacher grants case is one of several legal flashpoints as the Trump administration pushes for sweeping cuts to federal spending and agency programs. In a separate 5-4 decision last month, the justices rejected a request from the administration to freeze $2 billion in foreign aid payments, marking a rare setback in their use of the court’s emergency “shadow docket.”
A related lawsuit filed by private education groups challenging the same grant freeze is currently pending in a separate federal appeals court.
