This week, major right-wing legal circles debated education policy issues that are red meat for conservatives. Critical racial theories in K-12 schools, gender identity, the Title IX rule proposed by the Biden administration, and whether the Federal Department of Education should be abolished. .

The atmosphere at the Federalist Association’s all-day conference on education law and policy on Sept. 20 is a reflection of the way such issues are often dealt with, say, at a Donald Trump campaign rally or an angry school board meeting. It was different. Instead, it was a polite, polite discourse that included the participation of at least a few progressive dissenters. But the conference highlighted education issues that keep conservatives moving, from school board elections to gubernatorial and legislative elections.

Betsy DeVos, who served as U.S. Secretary of Education under President Trump, said in her keynote speech, “It’s amazing what has bloomed since we left this swamp town less than two years ago.

she said: [and] Feeling helpless, teachers are leaving the profession in large numbers. ”

Here’s how DeVos and other prominent conservative supporters at the conference addressed some of these issues.

Critical Racial Theories and Gender Identity

A session on a highly controversial framework for investigating systemic racism was dominated by criticism from the now-famous right. Some critics have argued that while the critical race theory may not have been formally taught in his K-12 school, the concept was used in teacher training, social-emotional learning, and even math textbooks. It claims to have permeated subtly into fields such as (For example, in Florida, which has laws restricting the teaching of race and racism in schools, authorities have identified four textbooks with content deemed objectionable under the state’s textbook adoption process. gave an example.)

“People think we’re crazy when we say we teach CRTs in second-grade math problems,” says several who challenge the school district’s alleged use of critical race theory. “It’s there, look for it,” said Kimberly Harman, general counsel for the Southeastern Law Foundation, which filed the lawsuit.

This was a panel preaching to the choir in the sense that an audience of about 100 advocates seemed to agree generally about CRT in schools and there were no progressive voices to dissent. .

Earlier, in a luncheon keynote address, former Trump administration Attorney General William Barr said at one point he referred to the early 1960s case of school prayer, as progressives “eradicate religion” from public schools. “This led me to advocate an alternative belief system,” he said. Support their new secular beliefs. ”

“What we are seeing today is actively indoctrinating children with ideologies and principles that are alternatives to religion,” said Barr, who cited critical racial theory and “transgenderism.” said.

“These are the ideologies that are being infused into schools right now,” Barr said. “But where can a state get out of it by forcing its citizens to submit to this kind of ideological indoctrination?”

At least one supporter said CRTs may be fading as a school problem.

“I think the real front line is in gender identity. [issue] from critical race theory [issue] Max Eden, research fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said: On the issue of gender identity in education, he said, “A showdown between red state America and the Biden administration is coming.”

Title IX regulations

That idea spilled over to the next panel, a discussion of pending regulations in the Biden administration. It provides formal guidance on key issues under Title IX of the Education Amendment of 1972, which prohibits sex discrimination in federally funded educational institutions.

Conservatives disagree with proposed rules for rolling back Trump-era regulations that provided for stricter due process in investigations of on-campus sexual assaults. And they oppose the Biden administration’s view that Title IX protects transgender students.

Roger Severino, vice president of the Heritage Foundation, said the proposed Biden Title IX rule falsely relied on a 2020 U.S. Supreme Court ruling regarding the rights of transgender students. Bostock vs. Clayton County, Georgia. That decision determined that the prohibition of sex discrimination in the workplace under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 covered sexual orientation and transgender status.

Severino said in the Majority Opinion of Justice Neil M. Gorsuch: Bostock“did not go out of his way to deny that this applies to Title IX.” (Severino added that Bostock It was a “terrible decision” that “has to be undone”. )

Asked about the problem of bullying in schools and the abuse of LGBTQ students, Severino said, “Does bullying require a federal response? Should the federal government say we need a new protection class for body size? No. This has to be handled at the local level.”

Federal Role in Education

The idea of ​​abolishing the US Department of Education has been around since 1979, when it was separated from the former Department of Health, Education and Human Services under President Jimmy Carter. Recently, it has gained renewed attention among conservatives, and in July he came to widespread publicity when DeVos called for the division to be abolished.

During Tuesday’s keynote, DeVos said the speech “made the corporate media laugh out loud.” This means journalists didn’t pay attention to the Trump administration’s proposal to return federal education aid to states in the form of large bloc grants.

“If that means you don’t need the department itself, well, so be it,” DeVos said.

Earlier in the day, at a panel devoted to the federal role in education, Neil McCluskey, director of the Center for Educational Freedom at the Libertarian Kate Institute, said: I don’t think it’s constitutional at all. ”

The Department of Education often goes beyond its mandate by issuing “dear colleagues” letters that interpret federal law, says Paul J. Ray, an economic policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation, and states and local officials. treats such communications as having legal effect.

(Such letters are not the same as formal rules or guidance, but departments often cast them as restating their legal obligations under a particular statute or regulation.)

But one of the panel’s progressive views, Bethany Little of the law and policy firm EducationCounsel and former White House education adviser to President Bill Clinton, argued that education for defense He said he has a long history of bipartisan support for federal legislation that promotes. and economic competitiveness.

“And … there is the responsibility of equal protection and equal opportunity,” she said. “These are things that the federal government is good at.”

Chester E. Finn, Jr., a former employee of the Department of Education under President George H.W. Bush and a longtime policymaker in Washington, said the role of the Federal Department of Education had swelled and gone too far. However, he expressed doubt that efforts to repeal it would bear fruit.

Finn, Distinguished Senior Fellow and Director Emeritus of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, said: “I think the department will stay here. It’s a moot point.”