The legal team representing a white teacher in a lawsuit accusing an Evanston school district of illegally promoting racial division and discrimination within their public schools through "anti-racism" policies and curriculum has persuaded federal education officials under President Trump to again investigate the school district for possible illegal discrimination against white students and school staffers.
On May 1, the U.S. Department of Education announced it had opened an investigation into Evanston-Skokie School District 65 for potential violations of Title VI of federal civil rights law.
According to the statement announcing the investigation, the investigation followed the filing of a complaint from the Southeastern Legal Foundation, a nonprofit constitutional law organization which claims a mission of protecting Americans against government overreach.
Kimberly Hermann
| Twitter
The SLF had filed a complaint on behalf of District 65 employee Stacy Deemar. The group has represented Deemar for four years in a lawsuit she filed against District 65 in Chicago federal court in 2021.
"The policies and practices to which the District allegedly subjects students and teachers shocks the conscience," said Craig Trainor, acting assistant secretary for civil rights within the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights, in a statement published with the investigation's announcement.
"Amid a dismal academic achievement record, the District appears to focus on unlawfully segregating students by race, instructing students to step forward and others to step back on the basis of race, and associating 'whiteness' with the devil.
"If true, how is this conceivable in America today?"
"... This Department of Education will not allow districts that receive federal funding to become safe spaces for racial segregation or any other unlawful discriminatory practices," Trainor said.
According to the release, federal investigators will look into policies and practices at District 65 "which allegedly constitute racial discrimination and stereotyping."
These allegedly include:
- Directing staff and students to participate in racially segregated so-called "privilege walks;"
- Sponsoring student and staff "affinity groups" based entirely on race;
- Requiring staff training sessions to "increase 'racial literacy,'" including discussion of the differences between "white talk" and "color commentary." According to the release, "white talk" was described as "loud, authoritative ... [and] controlling." "Color commentary," on the other hand, was described as "silent respect ... and disconnect;"
- Creating and using lesson plans instructing third through fifth grade students on how to "disrupt the Western nuclear family dynamics," while also instructing students from the age of four on how to be "activists and ... actively anti-racist" against a country that "has a racist history and is grounded in white privilege;" and
- Pressuring teachers to "acknowledge white privilege" and recognize and work against "whiteness." This allegedly included instructing elementary school teachers to read aloud to students from a book which allegedly "compares 'whiteness' to signing a deal with the devil."
The investigation would mark the second time the Department of Education under Trump has taken action against the Evanston school district.
In 2019, during Trump's first term as president, Deemar and the SLF had also filed a similar complaint over those alleged discriminatory policies and programs in the district.
The Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights then determined District 65 was violating federal law. However, that determination was overturned by the Education Department after Democrat Joe Biden became president in January 2021.
Deemar and SLF then filed suit in federal court instead, seeking a judicial determination that District 65 was violating the civil rights of white teachers and students in those schools.
According to court documents, Deemar has worked as a middle school drama teacher in District 65 since 2002.
District 65 operates 18 schools, serving more than 8,000 students from preschool to eighth grade.
Deemar's lawsuit asserted District 65's curriculum and training programs create an anti-white environment, in which "whiteness" is treated as negative and wrong, while "non-white racial identity" carries "positive traits."
Deemar's lawsuit claims these District 65 curriculum, program and policies encourage racism and discrimination towards white people among the district's students and staff.
In response, District 65 has defended its policies and programs, arguing Deemar shouldn't be allowed to sue because she never "personally suffered an injury" from the district's promotion of "anti-racism." They said Deemar has misinterpreted its programs and positions, which the district said are intended to rectify racial inequities and disparities among its students.
District 65 further argued it is Deemar who is seeking to violate the district's First Amendment rights, by seeking to use her lawsuit to win court orders restricting teachers' and administrators' ability to discuss race in classrooms and faculty training sessions and other meetings.
In August 2024, U.S. District Judge John J. Tharp Jr. sided with District 65, saying Deemar lacked legal standing to bring her lawsuit because Deemar can't show the district converted its campaign against "whiteness" into harmful acts of discrimination against her for being white.
The judge noted Deemar remains employed by the district. And the judge said Deemar can't show she was ever forced to attend any faculty meetings in which "staff members were segregated by race" or any other racially discriminatory workplace activities.
The judge noted Deemar has alleged the schools appear replete with messaging against "whiteness," including District 65 choosing to define racism as being "created for groups historically or currently defined as white being advantaged, and groups historically defined as non-white ... as disadvantaged," adding "racism is not mere 'racial prejudice,' but rather prejudice 'and power.'"
The judge further noted Deemar pointed to lesson plans and teacher training which asserted white supremacy forms "the bedrock" of Western "'society and its institutions' and white people 'infuse their racial prejudice into the laws, policies, practices, and society.'"
In his ruling, Tharp said it was not his job as a judge to decide if such statements are true or false, or "to evaluate their legitimacy" or their place in District 65's classrooms and faculty meetings.
"The Equal Protection Clause requires the states to treat each person as an individual and not a mere by-product of the social categories to which he or she belongs," Tharp wrote.
"And cases stemming from governmental failures to abide by that requirements are appropriate for judicial resolution; courts are well suited to identify and remedy injuries where people are treated differently because of their immutable characteristics, i.e., discriminated against.
"But Deemar has not persuaded the Court that the Equal Protection Clause enables federal courts to exercise jurisdiction over grievances about whether and how states can acknowledge the existence of social categories - or stake out claims about the origins and nature of discrimination pertaining to those social categories - without ever actually acting on those ideas by subjecting any individuals to some sort of differential, harmful treatment."
In his decision, however, Tharp dismissed Deemar's complaint without prejudice, meaning Deemar and the SLF would be allowed to revise their lawsuit and try again to address the perceived shortcomings identified by Tharp in his ruling.
According to court records, Deemar and the SLF filed an amended complaint in September 2024.
District 65 responded by asking the judge again to dismiss Deemar's lawsuit.
Each side then responded to that motion, with the most recent filing coming in November 2024.
Tharp had not yet ruled on District 65's motion to dismiss, and Deemar's lawsuit remained pending, as of May 5, 2025, according to federal court records.
District 65 is represented in the case by attorneys Nicki B. Bazer, Michael E. Warner Jr., Emily M. Tulloch and Reva G. Ghadge, of the firm of Franczek P.C., of Chicago.
Deemar is represented by attorneys Braden H. Boucek, Kimberly S. Hermann and Benjamin I.B. Isgur, of the Southeastern Legal Foundation, of Roswell, Georgia; and Whitman H. Brisky and Judith A. Kott, of Mauck & Baker, of Chicago.
Within the Department of Education's release announcing the new investigation and in a separate press release, SLF Executive Director Kimberly Hermann expressed gratitude to the Trump administration for renewing their scrutiny of the "unconscionable racial discrimination in District 65."
"Ever since the wrongful withdrawal four years ago of the Department of Education's finding that District 65's racial segregation, equity training, discipline policy, and other racially discriminatory policies violated America's civil rights laws, Dr. Deemar has waited patiently for the harms inflicted by the Biden Administration to be rectified," Hermann said in the release. "For the sake of our children and our country, the time to restore equality and reclaim civil liberties is now."