Educators, ACLU, NEA-NH, and GLAD Law Sue New Hampshire Over Yet Another Unconstitutional Attack on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
CONCORD, N.H. — A various group of educators and advocacy teams filed a federal lawsuit in the present day difficult a brand new anti-equity, anti-inclusion, and anti-diversity regulation in New Hampshire, which grew to become efficient on July 1, 2025, after being signed into regulation by Governor Ayotte in late June. The regulation, contained inside House Bill 2’s finances provisions, seeks to ban variety, fairness, and inclusion packages pertaining to race, gender, sexual orientation, gender id, and incapacity in New Hampshire colleges (together with each Ok-12 public colleges as properly as each private and non-private faculties and universities) and public entities like police departments and libraries.
According to the lawsuit, this regulation radically contradicts federal civil rights legal guidelines that defend the rights of scholars with disabilities, violates the First Amendment rights of educators and college students, and is obscure and ambiguous beneath the United States and New Hampshire Constitutions.
Megan Tuttle, NEA-New Hampshire president, said, “All Granite State children deserve a high-quality education, safe and welcoming public schools, and the support they need to thrive. We know diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and initiatives are not only legally required in certain contexts but also create a sense of belonging where all students can feel comfortable sharing their ideas and stories. Vague and confusing laws that have the effect of censoring or limiting educators’ abilities to teach and accommodate students who may have special education needs can undermine the high-quality education that students deserve. New Hampshire educators are standing together against HB 2’s unconstitutional attack on those programs and standing up to politicians’ overreach into our classrooms. Our profession should be guided by what’s best for our students, not the threat of funding restrictions and punishment. We will never stop working to make sure every child feels safe, seen, and is prepared for the future.”
The lawsuit was introduced by the state’s largest educator union, National Education Association – New Hampshire (NEA-NH), 4 college districts (Oyster River Cooperative School District, the Dover School District, the Somersworth School District, and the Grantham School District), coach and guide for variety, fairness, and inclusion James M. McKim, Jr., variety, fairness, and inclusion administrator and psychology professor Dottie Morris, and New Hampshire Outright, a nonprofit that gives coaching in public colleges and entities on creating environments of inclusion and belonging for LGBTQ+ college students.
They are represented by attorneys from a broad coalition of organizations and regulation corporations, together with the ACLU of New Hampshire, the nationwide ACLU’s Disability Rights Program and Racial Justice Program, National Education Association-New Hampshire (NEA-NH), GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD Law), and Drummond Woodsum & MacMahon.
Devon Chaffee, govt director of the ACLU of New Hampshire, mentioned, “This new law threatens to revoke critical public funding from Granite State schools using vague criteria unless they cease programming and policies aimed at fostering equitable and inclusive environments for all – and that’s unconstitutional. Just like with our other two lawsuits, we will continue to fight these unwarranted and unconstitutional attacks on diversity and inclusion efforts and our right to learn.”
The regulation doesn’t simply search to ban variety, fairness, and inclusion in public entities and public colleges, but it surely additionally seeks to strip away thousands and thousands of {dollars} in important state (and probably federal) public funding if Ok-12 public college districts guess improper as to how the New Hampshire Department of Education interprets the obscure regulation’s provisions. According to 1 estimate, state support to high school districts may quantity to greater than $1 billion yearly.
John Shea, the superintendent of the Somersworth School District, mentioned, “Looking at HB2’s attacks on diversity, equity, and inclusion, I’m worried that our legislature and our politicians may have lost sight of what these three words actually represent — and just how important they are to our public education system. ‘Diversity’ simply is who we are here in Somersworth. It’s not a program, initiative or ideology. It cannot be legislated away. And equity — or more particularly ‘equitable opportunity’ — is fundamental to the very idea of universal public education. As is ‘inclusiveness,’ one of our community’s most cherished values. We strive for a welcoming environment for all, one that is strengthened by diverse perspectives. The State’s attacks on diversity, equity, and inclusion are an attack on all of this. Special education, ESOL programs (English for Speakers of Other Languages), and the free and reduced meals program included — among many other examples. We have no choice but to fight the anti-DEI elements of HB2.”
Zoe Brennan-Krohn, director of the ACLU Disability Rights Program, mentioned, “New Hampshire’s anti-DEI law is an expansive assault on the rights and freedoms of students and educators across the state. Among those potentially swept up in this vague law are students with disabilities, many of whom rely on accessibility and integration programs to succeed at school. Federal disability rights laws require public schools to identify disabled students to increase their achievement; state law cannot prohibit what federal law mandates.”
The regulation is already arbitrarily and selectively being enforced by the state Department of Education, which is aggressively making use of it to non-public (together with spiritual) faculties and universities that obtain scholar scholarship funds via state grant support packages (like UNIQUE Program state grants and the Governor’s Scholarship), however apparently not personal Ok-12 colleges (together with spiritual colleges) that obtain public funds via Education Freedom Accounts.
The regulation additionally applies to non-public faculties and universities (for instance, Dartmouth College, Southern New Hampshire University, and Saint Anselm College) that obtain any type of state funding, together with those who obtain state scholarship grants that assist New Hampshire residents attend these faculties.
For private and non-private faculties and universities in New Hampshire, the stakes for Granite Staters are extreme: the quantity at stake contains over $22 million in annual UNIQUE Program state grants and over $2 million in annual Governor’s scholarship program state grants, that are each distributed based mostly on benefit and have to New Hampshire residents who attend personal or public New Hampshire faculties or universities.
“The lack of clarity about the expectations for how to comply with HB2’s anti-diversity, equity, and inclusion provisions, coupled with the severe and potentially devastating consequences a perceived violation may bring, have educators in a dilemma. As a result of this law, I am aware of several educators who will err on the side of caution out of concern and fear of engaging in some activity that might be perceived as diversity, equity, and inclusion related. The concern and fear of violating HB2’s directive will stifle educators’ abilities to adequately serve all of their students, to create school environments that support students from diverse lived experiences, and to ethically engage in their vocation,” mentioned Dottie Morris, a university administrator specializing in belonging and psychology professor, who’s a plaintiff on this case. She is bringing swimsuit solely in her particular person capability.
Also at stake are the thousands and thousands of {dollars} the State gives for working prices. All of this scholarship cash and operational funding might be ripped away if private and non-private faculties and universities guess improper as to how you can adjust to the regulation or with the schooling division’s interpretation of it.
The lawsuit additionally raises issues about how this regulation may affect college districts’ federally-mandated assortment of demographic information, together with racial and ethnic teams, in New Hampshire.
James T. McKim, Jr., a plaintiff in the case and who works often with state and native authorities our bodies to enhance operations, together with via variety, fairness, and inclusion practices, mentioned, “I am joining this suit because I believe the diversity, equity, and inclusion provision in HB2 goes against our Live Free or Die nature. It is unconstitutional. And it is harmful not only to me personally and to those in the protected classes mentioned in the law, but also to White people in our state and beyond. The work of helping organizations live into diversity, equity, and inclusion helps everyone.”
As the regulation was nonetheless making its means via the legislative course of, incapacity rights advocates expressed clear issues that important companies, packages, and trainings aimed at serving to the lives of individuals with disabilities might be dismantled by the regulation. The legislature failed to handle these issues in the closing invoice language that was in the end signed into regulation.
Jennifer Eber, litigation director for the Disability Rights Center – New Hampshire, who just isn’t a part of this lawsuit however opposed the regulation, mentioned, “Federal laws require school districts to provide specialized instruction and related services to qualifying students with disabilities. These federal laws protect the fundamental right of students with disabilities to access a free appropriate public education. Disability Rights Center -New Hampshire opposes HB2’s effort to undermine these federal laws and fully supports the request that the Court find HB2 both unconstitutional and preempted.”
The regulation additionally impacts LGBTQ+ college students in New Hampshire and might be considered as doubtlessly requiring the removing of sure programming, for instance, insurance policies establishing non-discrimination protections for transgender college students or making menstrual hygiene merchandise out there in gender impartial bogs.
Heidi Carrington Heath, govt director of New Hampshire Outright, a plaintiff in the case, mentioned, “N.H. Outright has been leading the way in caring for LGBTQ+ youth and their families for over 30 years. That includes a well-respected, evidence-based training program that many schools and communities across the Granite State have benefitted from. We know that creating healthier and stronger environments for LGBTQ+ youth does so for everyone. HB2 is an attempt to silence the voices of vulnerable Granite Staters and puts them at risk in a time when they need stronger supports than ever. We believe that it is critical to challenge this unjust law that is already causing harm to our organization, and communities.”
Hannah Hussey, employees legal professional at GLAD Law, mentioned, “This law is yet another unconstitutional attempt by elected officials seeking to control and censor valued and trusted educational programs in New Hampshire simply because they don’t like them. Imposing vague bans on programs related to race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability in our public schools and public and private colleges and universities will chill vital programs like special education services in our public schools, initiatives to increase the representation of girls in STEM, and other opportunities and resources to ensure equal opportunity for LGBTQ students, students of color, and students with disabilities. Such programs not only provide vital support for marginalized students, they contribute to an enriching environment for all students to get a well-rounded education, develop critical thinking skills, and learn to appreciate human differences.”
The courtroom paperwork additionally define how the regulation may forbid teaching programs designed to extend the illustration of women and girls in STEM courses, the use of tuition waivers or campus recruitment efforts for older learners 50 and up, or alternatives for spiritual college students via non secular actions.
This lawsuit follows a number of others filed in New Hampshire difficult anti-equity practices in schooling, together with a 2021 lawsuit in opposition to a classroom censorship regulation that was struck down in federal courtroom in May 2024, and one lawsuit filed on March 5, 2025 in New Hampshire by the ACLU of New Hampshire, nationwide ACLU, NEA, and NEA-NH in opposition to the U.S. Department of Education. These practices had been halted by the courtroom in April 2024.
Dr. Christine Boston, superintendent of Dover Public Schools, mentioned, “The Dover School District provides relevant and engaging learning experiences and curricula to each student, which could violate HB2’s anti-DEI provisions where such individualized instruction is for the purpose of ‘achieving demographic outcomes’ and classifies students based on the groups listed in RSA 354-A:1. The District celebrates the diversity of our student body, pursues equity to provide an individualized education, and creates inclusive learning environments. This commitment is required by the City of Dover school board and the State of New Hampshire. According to the Educational Equity Policy ACB of the Dover School District: ‘The ultimate goal of the Dover School District’s educational system is to assure that each and every student, regardless of background, has access to relevant and engaging learning experiences and curricula that they will need in order to thrive today and into the future. This foundation will allow our students to become dynamic global citizens as they adapt to a rapidly changing world.’ HB2’s vague ban on, for example, ‘critical race theory’ and ‘any program, policy, training, or initiative that classifies individuals based on a characteristic identified under RSA 354-A:1’—namely, age, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, creed, color, marital status, familial status, mental or physical disability, religion or national origin—’for the purpose of achieving demographic outcomes, rather than treating individuals equally under the law’ makes me question whether the N.H. Department of Education and others could view the District’s efforts to create relevant and engaging learning environments with well-rounded teachers and staff as violating HB2, thus jeopardizing much needed state and federal funding.”
Dr. Robert Shaps, the superintendent of the Oyster River Cooperative School District (ORCSD), mentioned, “HB 2, as written, directly contradicts our legal responsibility to meet our obligations under a wide range of preexisting laws that require school districts to improve learning outcomes for demographic groups. It contains broad and ambiguous declarations coupled with unclearly defined prohibited practices and no guidance. These determinations are subjective and unreviewable, and conflict with our legal and ethical responsibilities to our students. The ability to provide and apply resources and services that ensure all students succeed academically is crucial to their success. In effect, the New Hampshire State Government is using financial force to impose an unclear directive regarding educational learning opportunities, despite its constitutional responsibility to provide adequate school funding without conditions. This unprecedented ability gives them the ability to immediately halt all sources of public funding without warning if a school or district, knowingly or unknowingly, fails to abide by any section of the anti-DEI provisions. We cannot stand by as the state attempts to bypass its own legal responsibilities while failing to provide due process to respond to violations and offering no chance of appeal. We hope this legal action will defend our right to deliver a high-quality public school education and support a democratic, informed, and engaged community as we work together to protect our children’s future.”
Christine Downing, the superintendent of the Grantham School District, mentioned, “The Grantham School District is taking a proactive stance to protect its students and educational programs by challenging the diversity, equity, and inclusion prohibition language of HB2. The District is committed to providing a high-quality education that prepares students for a diverse, global society, grounded in principles of inclusion and equity. Due to a severe lack of clarity regarding what constitutes ‘DEI-related programs, initiatives, policies, and training,’ the District believes it’s essential to seek legal action. Without clear guidance from the Department of Education, the District cannot risk the possibility of arbitrary and unilateral actions by the Commissioner that could halt all sources of public funding. Joining this legal action is a necessary step to ensure the District can continue to provide the education our community expects and our students deserve.”
The grievance is obtainable right here: https://www.aclu.org/circumstances/national-education-association-new-hampshire-v-formella?doc=Complaint
Court Case: National Education Association – New Hampshire v. Formella
Affiliate: New Hampshire