Last Updated on August 13, 2025 by Bertrand Clarke
In a move that has ignited a firestorm of debate across New Hampshire, a new law embedded in the state’s biennial budget, signed by Governor Kelly Ayotte in June 2025, has outlawed diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs in public schools, universities, and government entities. Titled as part of House Bill 2 (HB 2), this legislation aims to eliminate what its supporters call discriminatory practices by prioritizing merit-based systems over identity-focused policies. However, a coalition of educators, civil rights groups, and advocacy organizations has launched a federal lawsuit, arguing that the law’s vague wording threatens educational equity and violates constitutional protections. The clash has turned New Hampshire into a battleground for a national debate over DEI, with far-reaching implications for schools, workplaces, and communities.
The Law: A Push for “Equal Treatment”
The new law, effective July 1, 2025, prohibits public entities—including K-12 schools, public colleges, and local governments—from implementing or promoting DEI-related programs, trainings, or policies. It specifically targets initiatives that “classify individuals based on a characteristic” such as race, gender, or disability “for the purpose of achieving demographic outcomes” rather than ensuring equal treatment under the law. Characteristics listed in the law mirror those protected under New Hampshire’s anti-discrimination statute (RSA 354-A:1), including age, sex, gender identity, race, creed, color, marital status, familial status, physical or mental disability, and national origin.
Supporters of the law, led by figures like State Representative Jess Edwards (R-Auburn), argue that DEI programs often veer into discriminatory territory by prioritizing certain groups over others. “This is about fairness,” Edwards stated during a legislative hearing in April 2025. “We should judge people by their character and qualifications, not their identity. DEI initiatives can create division rather than unity.” Proponents point to the law’s requirement that public entities review vendor contracts for DEI provisions, with oversight from the New Hampshire Department of Justice, as a necessary step to ensure compliance with merit-based principles.
The law imposes severe penalties for non-compliance. Public schools that “knowingly or unknowingly” violate the ban risk losing all state funding until they align with the new rules. By September 30, 2025, school districts were required to complete reviews of their contracts and report any DEI-related provisions to the state Department of Education, which must submit a comprehensive report to the legislature by October 1, 2025. As of August 13, 2025, 165 school districts have submitted compliance forms, though some, like Portsmouth and Grantham, have rescinded their initial submissions amid growing concerns about the law’s implications.
The Lawsuit: A Cry for Clarity and Constitutionality
On August 7, 2025, a coalition including the American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire (ACLU-NH), the National Education Association of New Hampshire (NEA-NH), GLBTQ Legal Advocates and Defenders (GLAD), and several school districts filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court of New Hampshire. The plaintiffs argue that HB 2 is “vague, irrational, and incomprehensible,” creating uncertainty that could stifle educational innovation and harm marginalized students. The lawsuit, backed by attorneys from Drummond Woodsum & MacMahon, contends that the law’s broad language risks violating First Amendment rights and federal anti-discrimination laws, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).
“The law’s ambiguity is its greatest flaw,” said Sarah Hinger, deputy director of the ACLU’s Racial Justice Program, during a press conference on August 8, 2025. “Educators are left guessing what counts as a DEI program, and the threat of losing funding creates a chilling effect on teaching anything related to diversity or inclusion.” The plaintiffs argue that the law could inadvertently prohibit programs like girls’ sports teams, free menstrual hygiene products for female students, or Holocaust education that addresses combating bigotry. They also express concern that special education services, which require individualized accommodations, could be misinterpreted as violating the ban due to its reference to “physical or mental disability.”
The lawsuit draws parallels to a 2021 New Hampshire law on “divisive concepts,” which barred teachers from advocating certain ideas about race and gender. That law was struck down in May 2024 by the U.S. District Court for being unconstitutionally vague, a decision currently under appeal in the First Circuit Court of Appeals. The plaintiffs hope for a similar outcome, arguing that HB 2’s lack of clear definitions and its application to both “knowing” and “unknowing” violations make it impossible for schools to comply without risking severe financial penalties.
A Broader Context: National Tensions Over DEI
New Hampshire’s anti-DEI law is part of a broader national push to curb diversity initiatives, particularly in education. In February 2025, the Trump administration issued a “Dear Colleague” letter to state education departments, demanding that public schools eliminate DEI programs or face the loss of federal funding. The letter cited the 2023 Supreme Court decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which ruled that race-based admissions policies violated the Equal Protection Clause. New Hampshire’s law aligns with this federal directive, but it goes further by extending the ban to state and local government operations and vendor contracts.
The national debate has been polarized. Supporters of anti-DEI measures, including conservative lawmakers and advocacy groups, argue that such programs often promote “reverse discrimination” by favoring certain groups over others. A 2024 Pew Research Center survey found that 46% of Americans believe DEI initiatives in workplaces and schools create unfair advantages, up from 41% in 2022. In New Hampshire, Governor Ayotte defended the law as a step toward “a level playing field,” echoing sentiments from her campaign trail in 2024, where she emphasized meritocracy and individual accountability.
Critics, however, see these bans as a rollback of progress toward equity. Arlynn Polletta, chief equity officer for the Exeter Region Cooperative School, told New Hampshire Public Radio on April 14, 2025, that DEI has been “mischaracterized” as a buzzword, when in reality, it fosters empathy and strengthens school communities. A 2025 report by the Center for American Progress found that DEI programs in schools correlate with a 15% reduction in disciplinary incidents among minority students, suggesting they contribute to safer, more inclusive environments.
Local Impact: Schools and Communities in Limbo
The law’s implementation has left New Hampshire’s educators and administrators scrambling. John Shea, superintendent of Somersworth School District, one of the plaintiffs, called the law an “attack on public education” in an April 2025 interview with New Hampshire Public Radio. “It’s not about left versus right—it’s about right versus wrong,” Shea said, emphasizing the need to focus on students’ daily educational needs rather than navigating vague legal mandates.
In Hanover, Superintendent Jay Badams reaffirmed his district’s commitment to its 2022 equity plan, stating on August 8, 2025, that “diversity, equity, and inclusion are fundamental to our mission.” The lawsuit includes districts like Dover, Hanover, Oyster River, Portsmouth, and even Norwich, Vermont, which receives some New Hampshire education funding. These districts argue that the law’s broad scope could jeopardize federal funding, which accounts for approximately 8% of New Hampshire’s K-12 education budget, or $150 million annually, according to the state’s Department of Education.
Private schools receiving public funds through New Hampshire’s Education Freedom Account program are also affected, as are private colleges, raising concerns about the law’s reach beyond public institutions. The Department of Justice, tasked with enforcing the law, has promised to respond to the lawsuit in court, with spokesperson Michael Garrity stating on August 8, 2025, that they will “review the complaint and respond as appropriate.”
Looking Ahead: A Legal and Cultural Crossroads
As the lawsuit progresses, all eyes are on the U.S. District Court, where Judge Landya McCafferty, who previously issued an injunction against a federal DEI ban in April 2025, will likely play a pivotal role. The plaintiffs are seeking a preliminary injunction to halt enforcement of HB 2 before the October 1 reporting deadline, arguing that the law’s penalties could devastate school budgets and disrupt education.
The case also reflects broader cultural tensions. A 2025 Gallup poll revealed that 62% of New Hampshire residents support teaching about historical inequalities in schools, yet 55% oppose mandatory DEI training for educators. This divide underscores the challenge of balancing free speech, educational freedom, and anti-discrimination protections.
For now, New Hampshire’s schools are caught in a legal and ideological tug-of-war. The outcome of this lawsuit could set a precedent for other states considering similar anti-DEI measures, such as Florida and Texas, which have faced their own legal challenges. As the debate unfolds, educators, students, and advocates await clarity on whether New Hampshire’s bold experiment in banning DEI will stand—or crumble under the weight of its own ambiguity.
