红杏视频

CONCORD, N.H. 鈥� The federal court in New Hampshire today issued a preliminary injunction blocking, for almost all public school districts, a law banning diversity, equity, and inclusion programs pertaining to race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability in New Hampshire K-12 public schools and public and private universities. The court held that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claims that the law violates due process and is contradicted by federal disability civil rights laws. The court explained: 鈥淭he breadth of the anti-DEI laws鈥� prohibition is startling. The definition of 鈥楧EI鈥� contained therein is so far-reaching that it prohibits long-accepted鈥攅ven legally required鈥攖eaching and administrative practices. It is hard to imagine how schools could continue to operate at even a basic level if the laws鈥� prohibitions were enforced to their full extent.鈥� The anti-equity, anti-inclusion, and anti-diversity law in New Hampshire became effective on July 1, 2025 after being signed into law by Gov. Ayotte in late June. The groups who filed suit argue it radically contradicts federal civil rights laws that protect the rights of students with disabilities, violates the First Amendment rights of educators, and is unlawfully vague and ambiguous under the United States and New Hampshire Constitutions. The court recognized that it is impossible for schools to comply with both federal disability laws and the anti-DEI law, and that the state law is therefore unconstitutional. The court also observed that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) 鈥渞equires conduct that the anti-DEI laws forbid: classifying students based on disability in order to improve outcomes for students with disabilities.鈥� The law is already being enforced arbitrarily, as the court explained: 鈥淭he incongruity in enforcing the anti-DEI laws against private colleges and universities supported by state-funded scholarships, but not private K-12 schools supported by EFAs, demonstrates that the laws permit or encourage arbitrary enforcement based on an enforcement authority鈥檚 subjective preferences.鈥� Devon Chaffee, executive director of the 红杏视频 of New Hampshire, said: 鈥淭his court victory could not come at a more critical time. Students across New Hampshire have the right to an inclusive education and educators in our state should not be threatened with vague laws that restrict their ability to meet the needs of their students. By continuing to block this unconstitutional law, the court has made clear that all students in the Granite State deserve equitable pathways to learn and thrive.鈥� The legal challenge was brought by the state鈥檚 largest educator union, National Education Association 鈥� New Hampshire (NEA-NH), four school districts (Oyster River Cooperative School District, the Dover School District, the Somersworth School District, and the Grantham School District), trainer and consultant for diversity, equity, and inclusion James M. McKim, Jr., diversity, equity, and inclusion administrator and psychology professor Dottie Morris, and New Hampshire Outright, a nonprofit that provides training in public schools and entities on creating environments of inclusion and belonging for LGBTQ+ students. Mr. McKim and Dr. Morris bring this case in their individual capacities. They are represented by lawyers from a broad coalition of organizations and law firms, including the 红杏视频 of New Hampshire, the national 红杏视频鈥檚 Disability Rights Program and Racial Justice Program, National Education Association-New Hampshire (NEA-NH), GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD Law), and Drummond Woodsum & MacMahon. Megan Tuttle, president of NEA-New Hampshire, stated: 鈥淭his ruling affirms what we鈥檝e always known: every student in New Hampshire deserves access to a high-quality public education in a safe, inclusive, and supportive environment. The anti-DEI language in HB 2 threatened that promise. Programs and instruction that reflect the values of diversity, equity, and inclusion are not just educationally sound, in many cases, they are legally required. Yet the vague and confusing language buried in the state budget sought to censor educators and restrict our ability to meet the needs of all students, including those who rely on special education services. New Hampshire鈥檚 educators will continue to stand firmly against unconstitutional political interference in our classrooms because we are committed to ensuring every child receives an appropriate education based on their individual needs and feels safe, valued, and fully prepared for the bright future they deserve. That鈥檚 the New Hampshire way.鈥� Heidi Carrington Heath, executive director of New Hampshire Outright, a plaintiff in the case, said: 鈥淭he court鈥檚 decision to continue blocking this unjust law ensures that LGBTQ+ youth and their families can continue accessing safe school and community environments, fostered by well-respected, evidence-based training programs that many schools and public entities across the Granite State benefit from. Creating healthier and stronger environments for LGBTQ+ youth does so for everyone.鈥� James T. McKim, Jr., a plaintiff in the case and who works regularly with state and local government bodies to improve operations, including through diversity, equity, and inclusion practices, said: 鈥淭he continued block on this harmful law means that organizations (including educational institutions) can continue improving their performance by exploring how to obtain the proven benefits of equitably including diverse people and perspectives - and that helps every Granite Stater." 鈥淚 thank the court for continuing to block this law so that educators may adequately serve every single one of their students and create school environments that support learners from diverse lived experiences,鈥� said Dottie Morris, a college administrator focusing on belonging and psychology professor, who is a plaintiff in this case. She is bringing suit only in her individual capacity. Zoe Brennan-Krohn, director of the 红杏视频 Disability Rights Program, said: 鈥淭he court saw this law for what it is: an expansive and illegal attack on the rights of students. This decision affirms that all New Hampshire students have an equal right to education, and that the state cannot undermine federal protections for disabled students.鈥� Hannah Hussey, staff attorney at GLAD Law, said,:鈥淭oday the Court recognized that HB 2 unlawfully prevents initiatives that ensure equal educational access for all New Hampshire students. It protects the ability of New Hampshire educators and educational institutions to effectively prepare our students to live, work, and contribute to our communities. This includes providing trusted educational programs to help students learn to navigate differences respectfully鈥攁 practical skill in our diverse world. HB 2鈥檚 vague bans on programs related to race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability wrongfully prohibit efforts to provide equal educational opportunity for female students, LGBTQ students, students of color, and students with disabilities. It disadvantages all students and undermines our values of freedom and opportunity for all.鈥� Dr. Christine Boston, superintendent of Dover Public Schools, said: 鈥淭he Dover School District is committed to providing individualized, inclusive, and equitable education, as mandated by local and state policies. However, HB2鈥檚 vague restrictions on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts鈥攅specially those that involve recognizing student demographics鈥攔aise concerns that the District鈥檚 practices could be misinterpreted as violations, potentially risking vital state and federal funding.鈥� Dr. Robert Shaps, the superintendent of the Oyster River Cooperative School District (ORCSD), said: 鈥淲e are grateful and relieved that Chief Judge Landya B. McCafferty issued an injunction blocking this law as the case proceeds through the judicial system. This decision represents an important victory for New Hampshire students and their families. Judge McCafferty鈥檚 ruling reaffirms the state鈥檚 constitutional responsibility to provide adequate school funding without conditions. Schools should be a place where educators and students can exchange ideas and share different viewpoints as part of the learning experience.鈥� Christine Downing, the superintendent of the Grantham School District, said: 鈥淭he Grantham School District appreciates the Court's decision to grant a preliminary injunction against the DEI prohibitions found in HB2. This decision recognizes the concerns regarding the law's vague language and its potential chilling effect on our educational programming, as well as concerns regarding the law鈥檚 proposed unilateral and arbitrary loss of funding without providing a full understanding of what constitutes a violation. As a district, we remain committed to our mission to prepare students to thrive in a diverse, global world by honoring each other, valuing uniqueness, encouraging empathy, and fostering an inclusive environment where all our students 鈥� including those with disabilities and from diverse backgrounds 鈥� receive the support and education they are guaranteed under federal and state law. We will continue to monitor the ongoing litigation and look forward to further clarity as this critical case progresses.鈥� John Shea, the superintendent of the Somersworth School District, said: 鈥淎t a time when the rule of law is being trampled, by our very own government, it is heartening to receive this decision. The Somersworth School District is proud to stand up, with all of the other plaintiffs and our legal team, for the American values that are simply fundamental to universal public education. Moving forward, I鈥檓 desperately hopeful that this sort of distractive and destructive legislative gamesmanship will stop. We must find a way to come together 鈥� around some basic common ground 鈥� and move past all the divisive rhetoric and wasted time. Let鈥檚 get on with the important work of the noble American experiment. And let's take good care of our kids 鈥� all of them.鈥� The court鈥檚 order is available here: /cases/national-education-association-new-hampshire-v-formella?document=Order-Granting-Preliminary-Injunction

SEATTLE 鈥� Gather Church, a ministry in Lewis County, Washington, today filed a lawsuit challenging a county ordinance that makes it nearly impossible for the church to fulfill a core part of its religious mission: providing harm reduction services for residents with substance use disorder. Harm reduction services use non-judgmental strategies to minimize the negative health, social, and legal consequences associated with drug use. The lawsuit, which was filed in the Western District Court of Washington, alleges violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Rehabilitation Act, Washington state anti-discrimination laws, Washington state constitutional protections for religious liberty, and that the local ordinance violates state laws that permit and encourage harm reduction services. Gather Church is represented by the 红杏视频, 红杏视频 of Washington, and law firm Kaplan & Grady. 鈥淐onnection is essential for health. Our syringe services program allows us to make connections with people who are poor, hungry, addicted, lonely, and unhoused. The program is motivated by our faith, but also by the brain science of addiction. We know what works, and our program is incredibly effective,鈥� said Cole Meckle, pastor at Gather Church. Since 2010, Gather Church has been devoted to helping Lewis County residents in need. Founded amid the opioid epidemic, Gather focused its efforts on residents with substance use disorder, eventually expanding its programs to include a food and clothing bank, a clinic that provides medication for addiction treatment and primary health care, and intensive outpatient therapy. Gather opened a syringe services program (SSP) in 2019, which gives sterile syringes to people who would otherwise share contaminated syringes to inject drugs. The program was supported by a grant from the State Department of Health and built on decades of research showing that SSPs save lives, reduce the transmission of disease, and do not increase drug use or local crime. It is the policy of Washington state to support and encourage SSPs because they are so effective at preventing HIV transmission and reducing injection risk behaviors, promoting access to naloxone, increasing exposure to overdose education, and facilitating referral to and enrollment in treatment services. SSPs like Gather Church鈥檚 do not increase drug use, unsafe syringe disposal practices, or neighborhood crime rates. However, in April 2024, Lewis County adopted an ordinance that bans Gather from distributing sterile syringes through its mobile clinic and from distributing lifesaving supplies like test kits for fentanyl and xylazine. As a result, Gather cannot serve most of its community because many have disabilities that prevent them from traveling to Gather. 鈥淪yringe services programs and other harm reduction services have saved countless lives and are key tools to help stem the opioid epidemic in Washington state and across the country,鈥� said Malhar Shah, senior staff attorney with the 红杏视频 Disability Rights Program. 鈥淭his ordinance in Lewis County not only prevents Gather Church from fulfilling its religious duty to the community, but it also denies people with substance use disorder and other disabilities access to this important public health program鈥攊n violation of federal disability laws.鈥� 鈥淟ewis County鈥檚 ordinance is rooted in decades-old stigma against people who use drugs, driven by misinformation that harm reduction programs increase drug use and crime,鈥� said Tara Urs, staff attorney with 红杏视频-WA. 鈥淎n overwhelming body of research demonstrates that harm reduction programs work. Pastor Cole and Gather have set an example by bringing evidence-based, public health programs to rural communities who would otherwise struggle with unmet needs for care, compassion, and treatment." 鈥淕ather Church's religious mission is serving people struggling with drug addiction. Lewis County directly targeted the church 鈥� the county鈥檚 sole syringe service program 鈥� in direct violation of civil rights and religious liberty protections,鈥� said David Howard Sinkman of Kaplan & Grady. 鈥淟ocal governments cannot be allowed to discriminate against members of their communities or prohibit the free exercise of religious faith." The lawsuit also alleges that the ordinance prevents Gather from providing tangible acts of service consistent with its faith, and hinders it from being able to provide lifesaving health services to people with substance use disorder.

CONCORD, N.H. 鈥� The federal court in New Hampshire today temporarily blocked, for most public school districts, a law banning diversity, equity, and inclusion programs pertaining to race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability in New Hampshire K-12 public schools, public and private universities, and public entities. The Court鈥檚 temporary order lasts until September 18 and covers the four plaintiff school districts (Oyster River Cooperative School District, Dover School District, Somersworth School District, and the Grantham School District), as well as any other 鈥減ublic school鈥� defined under the law (which includes colleges and universities) that employs, contracts with, or works with plaintiffs NEA-NH or its members, consultant and trainer James T. McKim, educator Dottie Morris, or New Hampshire Outright. The order also covers any other public school district that provides services to a student of the four plaintiff school districts under civil rights laws protecting students with disabilities. The anti-equity, anti-inclusion, and anti-diversity law in New Hampshire became effective on July 1, 2025 after being signed into law by Governor Ayotte in late June. The groups who filed suit argued it radically contradicts federal civil rights laws that protect the rights of students with disabilities, violates the First Amendment rights of educators and students, and is unlawfully vague and ambiguous under the United States and New Hampshire Constitutions. Devon Chaffee, executive director of the 红杏视频 of New Hampshire, said, 鈥淭emporarily blocking this law for most public school districts means that, as we go into a new school year, the court is protecting our academic freedom, the free speech rights of educators, and the right of New Hampshire students to have an inclusive education. This latest attempt to attack diversity, equity, and inclusion is unconstitutional and we will continue to steadfastly fight anti-liberty efforts like this, which create censorship in our schools and public entities.鈥� The Court鈥檚 temporary restraining order states, 鈥淎t this provisional stage鈥攁nd especially in light of (1) the impending September 5 certification deadline for K-12 schools that the department of education continues to insist upon, (2) the complete lack of any authority known to the court or the parties that would permit the department to insist on that deadline, and (3) the crippling penalties facing schools for even 鈥渦nknowing鈥� noncompliance with the anti-DEI laws鈥攖he court finds that all of these factors weigh in favor of a TRO pending a decision on plaintiffs鈥� preliminary injunction motion.鈥� The lawsuit was brought by the state鈥檚 largest educator union, National Education Association 鈥� New Hampshire (NEA-NH), four school districts (Oyster River Cooperative School District, the Dover School District, the Somersworth School District, and the Grantham School District), trainer and consultant for diversity, equity, and inclusion James M. McKim, Jr., diversity, equity, and inclusion administrator and psychology professor Dottie Morris, and New Hampshire Outright, a nonprofit that provides training in public schools and entities on creating environments of inclusion and belonging for LGBTQ+ students. They are represented by lawyers from a broad coalition of organizations and law firms, including the 红杏视频 of New Hampshire, the national 红杏视频鈥檚 Disability Rights Program and Racial Justice Program, National Education Association-New Hampshire (NEA-NH), GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD Law), and Drummond Woodsum & MacMahon. Zoe Brennan-Krohn, director of the 红杏视频 Disability Rights Program, said: 鈥淪tudents with disabilities in New Hampshire are entitled to special education services, inclusion, and accessibility, all of which were targeted by this law. While we await a preliminary injunction decision, this temporary order rightly recognizes New Hampshire鈥檚 law as an expansive and illegal assault on the rights of all students, including students with disabilities. The state cannot undermine the rights and protections enshrined by federal disability rights laws. We鈥檒l keep fighting to ensure no student is denied equal access to their education under this law.鈥� Hannah Hussey, staff attorney at GLAD Law, said, 鈥淲e welcome this interim order as it protects the ability of educators and educational institutions to carry out their professional duties and continue providing trusted educational programs in New Hampshire. More importantly, it ensures that students can continue to receive a quality, well-rounded education and the skills they need to succeed in our ever-diversifying world. As this case moves through the court, we鈥檒l continue to show how HB 2鈥檚 vague bans on programs related to race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability unlawfully chill and censor vital initiatives that ensure equal educational opportunity for female students, LGBTQ students, students of color, and students with disabilities.鈥� Megan Tuttle, president of NEA-New Hampshire, stated: 鈥淓very Granite State student deserves a high-quality public education in a safe, inclusive, and supportive environment. Programs and initiatives, including classroom instruction, that recognize the importance of diversity, equity, and inclusion are not only essential to fostering a sense of belonging for all students, they are also legally required in many cases. Though we await a decision on the preliminary injunction motion, this temporary order affirms our position that the anti-DEI language in HB 2 is vague and confusing. As a result, the law impermissibly censors educators and limits their ability to meet the needs of all students, including those requiring special education services. New Hampshire educators are taking a stand against this unconstitutional overreach into our classrooms because of our deep commitment to our students. We will never stop fighting to ensure every child feels safe, valued, and fully prepared for the bright future they deserve.鈥�