Proposed Rescission of the Equity Assistance Center Program Regulations

MAEC, a national organization representing Pre-K to grade 8 principals, opposes the full rescission of the Equity Assistance Center Program Regulations. They argue that the program provides essential technical assistance for addressing educational disparities and request a more targeted approach to program improvements instead of a complete removal.

College Match Pros, LLC opposes the proposed rescission of the Equity Assistance Center (EAC) Program regulations. The company argues that the EAC provides essential, specialized expertise and localized support that are necessary for expanding educational opportunities for underserved students and cannot be easily replaced by the Department of Justice.

The Woodhull Freedom Foundation opposes the Department of Education's proposed rule to rescind the Equity Assistance Center Program regulations. They argue that the rescission threatens civil rights and gender equality by removing protections for transgender and gender-diverse individuals in schools.

Citizens Defending Freedom (CDF), a nonprofit public policy organization, supports the proposed rescission of the Equity Assistance Center Program regulations. They argue that the program has drifted from its original purpose to promote ideological agendas like DEI and CRT, and that rescinding the regulations will allow for more flexible, merit-based technical assistance.

A professional in the field of educational equity opposes the proposed rescission of the Equity Assistance Center Program Regulations. The commenter argues that the rescission would create a policy vacuum and strip away essential accountability safeguards, suggesting targeted amendments instead of a full repeal.

The commenter, a private citizen, opposes the proposed rescission of the Equity Assistance Center (EAC) program. They argue that the program provides cost-effective, proactive technical assistance to schools to ensure civil rights compliance and prevent costly litigation while maintaining local control.

The commenter, writing as an individual, opposes the rescission of the Equity Assistance Center Program Regulations. They argue that these centers provide unique, localized expertise and a history of service that are essential for reducing discrimination and increasing educational access.

Jacqueline Andrews supports the rescission of the Equity Assistance Center Program Regulations, arguing that the current regulations have drifted from the original intent of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. She contends that the program's focus on identity categories is unnecessary given the rarity of new desegregation orders and that rescission would allow for more efficient delivery of assistance.