McClellan Leads House Members in Opposing Department of Education’s Rollback of Key Civil Rights Protections

About Committees and Caucuses Our District Votes and Legislation Contact Email Me Newsletter Subscribe Office Locations Request an Appearance Website Problem Share Your Story Media 2025 in Review 118th Congress in Review In the News Media Kit Newsletters Press Releases Issues Agriculture Armed Services Civil Rights Communications And Technology Congress Economy Education Energy/Environment Health Immigration National Security Repro VA-04 Veterans What Issues Matter To You? Services Art Competition Black History Month Essay Contest Casework Tips! Commendations and Greetings Congressional App Challenge Flags Grant Applicants Help With a Federal Agency Internships Service Academy Nominations Tours and Tickets Valentines for Vets Youth Advisory Council Resources Appropriations Requests Government Shutdown Resources & FAQs Know Your Breastfeeding Rights Know Your Federal Employee Rights Know your Immigration Rights Know Your Reproductive Rights Follow Follow Follow Follow Follow Follow McClellan Leads House Members in Opposing Department of Education’s Rollback of Key Civil Rights Protections August 18, 2026 | Civil Rights , Congress , Education , Press Releases Washington, D.C. – On Monday, August 10th, Congresswoman Jennifer McClellan (VA-04) led 19 House Members in calling on the U.S. Department of Education to reverse its elimination of a critical tool to protect students from discrimination under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. In a letter to Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Kimberly Richey, the lawmakers pressed the Department for answers about how this rollback will affect the federal government’s ability to identify and address discriminatory practices in schools. The Department’s decision comes as students across the country continue to face disparities in school discipline and access to educational opportunities. By eliminating disparate impact protections, the Department has narrowed the tools available to federal civil rights officials to address discriminatory outcomes, particularly in cases where discriminatory intent may be difficult to establish. The lawmakers also demanded an explanation for the Department’s decision to finalize the rollback without first seeking public input through the traditional notice-and-comment process. “For decades, disparate impact analysis has enabled OCR to investigate facially neutral policies that produce unjustified discriminatory outcomes, even when there is no direct evidence of discriminatory intent,” wrote the lawmakers . “Although Title VI prohibits intentional discrimination, the Department’s implementing regulations have long recognized that practices with an unjustified discriminatory effect may unlawfully deny students equal educational opportunity. By rescinding these regulations, the Department has fundamentally altered the framework through which OCR investigates and remedies systemic discrimination.” The lawmakers continued , “The Department has stated that OCR investigators will no longer rely on statistical disparities to support findings of discrimination and instead will be required to establish intentional discrimination through other evidence. This represents a significant departure from longstanding enforcement practice and raises serious questions about OCR’s ability to address systemic inequities that often manifest through patterns and practices rather than explicit discriminatory intent. Because discriminatory intent is rarely overt, requiring complainants to meet this heightened evidentiary burden may substantially reduce the Department’s ability to identify and remedy violations of Title VI.” The letter asks for a response to the following questions and requests for further information: Please provide the legal analysis and supporting memorandum relied upon by the Department in rescinding the Title VI disparate impact regulation. What legal authority did the Department rely upon to conclude that notice-and-comment rulemaking was unnecessary? Did the Department conduct any analysis regarding the anticipated impact of this rescission on students protected under Title VI? If so, please provide those analyses. How will OCR investigate complaints alleging racial discrimination now that disparate impact analysis has been removed from the Department’s regulations? What evidentiary standards will OCR apply when determining whether intentional discrimination has occurred? Have OCR investigators received revised guidance or training concerning the investigation of Title VI complaints? If so, please provide all guidance, memoranda, and training materials. Does the Department anticipate issuing additional guidance to schools, colleges, or OCR staff regarding enforcement of Title VI following this rescission? If so, when will that guidance be released? “We are troubled by the Department’s decision to issue this final rule without first soliciting public input through notice-and-comment rulemaking,” the lawmakers concluded . “Congress has a respon