“See you in court!” NEA and AFT litigation update
By Emma Blazczyk and John Hulet, Education Minnesota law clerks
Since returning to office in January of 2025, the Trump Administration has issued a flurry of executive orders and directives that attempt to dramatically reshape the federal government.
The NEA and AFT have been hard at work challenging executive actions that violate federal law, attempt to undermine public education and weaken collective bargaining. Below, we have provided a roundup of the critical lawsuits the NEA and AFT and partner organizations have filed to protect the rights of our members, students and the rule of law.
Anti-DEI guidance and federal funding cuts
American Federation of Teachers et al v. U.S. Dept. of Education
The U.S. Department of Education issued a February 2025 Dear Colleague letter that threatened to revoke federal funding for any school or college that engaged in certain DEI efforts. This letter also demanded local districts certify their compliance with the letter. Further, the department set up a portal for the public to report educators for teaching “divisive ideologies and indoctrination.”
The letter unsettled educators and prompted many to delete educational programming that might conflict with the department’s vague guidance.
In response, the AFT and the NEA challenged enforcement of the letter and the portal. In April 2025, three federal courts granted relief, arguing that the DOE does not have authority to reach into state or local curricular and instructional matters, and it may not silence viewpoints that it disfavors. In early 2026, the DOE abandoned its appeal, solidifying that the department cannot enforce the letter against any school district or college.
American Federation of Teachers et al v. U.S. Dept. of Justice et al.
In March of 2025, four federal agencies announced the cancellation of $400 million in funding to Columbia University over what the administration described as “continued inaction in the face of persistent harassment of Jewish students.” Columbia yielded to many of the administration’s demands, but AAUP and AFT sued later in the month, arguing the administration’s funding cuts and demands constituted efforts to overpower Columbia’s academic autonomy and to enforce speech restrictions – damaging vital scientific research. Unfortunately, the federal judge dismissed the lawsuit, arguing AFT and AAUP did not demonstrate their members experienced harm. AFT and AAUP filed an appeal, which is ongoing.
Defense of the U.S. Department of Education
Coalition v. Trump Administration
Created by Congress in 1979, the U.S. Department of Education performs a variety of functions that affect the work and lives of millions of students and educators.
In March of 2025, the Trump Administration issued an executive order attempting to initiate the dismantling of the Department. These efforts included significant staff reductions, the termination of contracts and grants and the movement of crucial programs to other agencies.
Soon after, a coalition of advocacy organizations, including the NEA and AFT, sued the administration over its attempts to eliminate the Department without Congressional action. After winning several early injunctions in district court, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed and allowed these efforts to proceed while the case continues.
Student debt and loan repayment
American Federation of Teachers v. U.S. Department of Education
Established by the U.S. DOE over 30 years ago, the federal Income-Driven Repayment (IDR) program was a lifeline to millions of borrowers, as it allowed borrowers to adjust their loan payments to be affordable based on their family size and income.
However, shortly after taking office, the Trump Administration removed the IDR application from the department’s website and halted processing of all new applications.
On March 18, 2025, AFT sued to correct this violation and reinstate the program. As of Oct. 17, 2025, the parties in the lawsuit have agreed to a joint status report in which the Trump Administration agreed to resume processing applications as required by law while the lawsuit continues.
This agreement also saved many borrowers who experienced processing delays from adverse consequences resulting from recent federal tax law changes.
Immigration enforcement and safety
Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste (PCUN) v. Noem and Fridley et al. v. Mullin
After Education Minnesota’s lawsuit regarding ICE activity during Operation Metro Surge, NEA and AFT filed a similar lawsuit in Oregon, along with a worker’s rights organization called Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste (PCUN).
A court heard oral arguments in that case in late April, and the parties are awaiting a decision.
A Minnesota district court denied a similar request in Education Minnesota’s lawsuit, but the case has not been dismissed as of this writing.
Federal labor rights and employee protections
FEA v. Trump
The NEA, through its affiliate the Federal Education Association, is representing teachers employed by the U.S. Department of Defense in a lawsuit attempting to restore collective bargaining rights to over 950,000 federal employees.
These rights were undermined by an executive order issued in March of 2025, purporting to re-categorize a number of federal agencies as part of “national security” and therefore exempt from a federal collective bargaining law.
The lawsuit argues that the order violated the First Amendment rights of federal workers, enabling retaliation and facilitating mass layoffs for the purpose of weakening political opposition.
The unions further assert that the order did not follow proper procedures for suspending the collective bargaining rights of federal employees.
AFSCME and AFGE v. Trump
On Aug. 27, 2025, President Trump expanded the March 2025 order to include several new federal agencies, including the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM) which operates Voice of America.
The next day, USAGM cancelled its collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) with the unions representing these federal workers.
However, a preliminary injunction went into effect on November 14, 2025, ordering the CBAs to be reinstated as the lawsuit continues.
NEA/AFT v. Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS)
Soon after President Trump’s return to office, Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) worked quickly to enact dramatic layoffs at numerous federal agencies, including the FMCS, which is an independent government agency that provides mediation services to employees at both the state and national level.
On March 14, 2025, President Trump signed an order that dramatically reduced FMCS’ workforce: all of the FMCS’ field offices closed, the mediation workforce was reduced to five, and nine percent of the staff were placed on leave.
On April 14, 2025, several unions sued, arguing that these reductions are illegal. On Dec. 30, 2025, the Southern District of New York agreed and granted the union’s requests that the reduction in workforce be reversed.
Conclusion
The lawsuits filed by our national unions are an important check on this administration’s efforts to weaken the professional workforce that powers the federal government. While it is not the only tool, litigation has played an important role in stopping this administration from implementing unlawful executive orders that would harm educators, workers and students.
This Legal Briefs column, written by Education Minnesota legal staff, is one of an occasional series on legal developments that affect educators.
