Federal Civil Rights Protections for Students Are Being Hollowed Out

Civil rights rollbacks in education are part of a broader effort to reassert patriarchal control over who learns, teaches and works.

At least 25,000 unresolved civil rights complaints involving race, gender and disability discrimination are currently stalled as the Trump administration moves to dismantle the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights—leaving students in K-12 schools and colleges with few viable paths to federal protection.

Through executive orders, mass staff reductions, and the closure of seven of the department’s 12 regional offices, enforcement of civil rights law in education has been effectively hollowed out.

At the same time, new Title IX guidance has shifted federal priorities away from survivors of sexual violence and toward expanded due-process protections for the accused—further eroding accountability in school environments already struggling to respond to gender-based harm.

Taken together, these changes represent a sweeping redefinition of equal access to education—one that disproportionately harms women, students of color, disabled students and survivors of sexual assault.

Without staff or regional offices to process complaints, students facing bias or abuse are increasingly left on their own.

These findings emerged during a Jan. 27 forum hosted by the Clearinghouse on Women’s Issues, where education and civil rights experts unpacked how the administration’s education agenda fits into a broader project aimed at reinforcing patriarchal and exclusionary norms.

Jeanette Lim Esbrook, vice president of legal affairs at CWI and a former official in both the Department of Education and the Office for Civil Rights, described how the dismantling of OCR has effectively paralyzed investigations into discrimination claims. Without staff or regional offices to process complaints, students facing bias or abuse are increasingly left on their own.

Peter McDonough, general counsel at the American Council on Education, and Connie Cordovilla, CWI’s vice president of membership, explained how these enforcement rollbacks are paired with structural changes designed to push women out of higher education and the workforce. Proposed revisions to graduate student loan programs and the reclassification of women-dominated fields—such as nursing and physical therapy—as “non-professional” would cap annual loan access at roughly $20,000, far below the cost of many required degree programs.

The political climate created by these federal moves has emboldened conservative lawmakers at the state level. In Republican-controlled states like South Carolina, legislators have increasingly targeted faculty, institutions and curricula that challenge patriarchal or extremist ideologies.

Last semester, after I published a piece in Ms. critiquing Charlie Kirk and violent masculinity, South Carolina politicians—including Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette and Rep. Ralph Norman—publicly suggested I should be fired. State representatives pressured the small private liberal arts college where I taught to do just that, eventually publishing a letter threatening to revoke state lottery scholarships from students if the school did not terminate me. (I’ve written more about that experience on my Substack, Hot Feminism.)

In a climate where ideologically driven attacks on funding and governance threaten the very survival of colleges and universities, I ultimately resigned my full professorship. The message from state lawmakers was unmistakable: Even private institutions are no longer insulated from direct government interference, regardless of stated commitments to academic freedom.

Despite the severity of these threats, forum speakers also emphasized that pathways for resistance remain—particularly at the state and collective level.

Susan Moen, a Stop Sexual Assault in Schools advisory board member based in Oregon, urged educators and communities to turn to state civil rights offices and state law when federal enforcement fails. She stressed the importance of understanding district-level policies and demanding their enforcement through community organizing and grassroots advocacy.

Esbrook highlighted the formation of an Office for Civil Rights alumni collective, which works to support current employees and preserve institutional knowledge as the administration attempts to dismantle the agency.

McDonough underscored the critical role of university associations—such as the American Council on Education and the American Association of University Professors—which, unlike individual campuses, are often better positioned to challenge federal overreach through coordinated legal action.

While some of the administration’s efforts to reshape education in service of a white supremacist agenda have been delayed or only partially implemented, their chilling effect is already real. Schools have scaled back DEI programs, faculty have been disciplined or fired for dissent, and administrators have avoided hiring leaders who support trans rights—all under threat of political retaliation.

Even when these attacks fall short, they succeed in reshaping who feels safe in classrooms, what students are allowed to learn and whether educators feel able to show up at all. With Project 2025 and related initiatives looming, continued efforts to remake education along patriarchal lines are all but guaranteed. Defending the rights of students and educators will require sustained resistance—at the ballot box, in the courts and within our communities.