The Trump administration has suspended $1 billion for child mental health services, saying that a program funded by a bipartisan law aimed at preventing gun violence in schools is not in “the federal government's greatest interests.”
Lawmakers approved the money in 2022 after a former student fired a shot at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, killing 19 children and two teachers and injuring 17 people. Known as the Bipartisan Safer Community Act, the measure has broken decades-long impasse between Congressional Republicans and Democrats to address gun violence by focusing primarily on improving student mental health support.
But as some mental health programs have begun, the education department this week notified grant recipients that they must cancel funds and reapply for money for potential violations of federal civil rights laws.
According to a notice reviewed by The New York Times, the department did not designate civil rights laws or provide evidence of violations to grant recipients.
A spokesperson for the Department of Education confirmed that the grant was cancelled as it focuses on increasing diversity in psychologists, counselors and other mental health workers.
“Under the highly flawed priorities of the Biden administration, grant recipients can use funds to implement racially-based actions that employ quotas in ways not related to mental health, and may hurt students who believe the grant should help.” “We mandate American families to ensure that taxpayer dollars support evidence-based practices that truly focus on improving students' mental health.”
Biederman refused to provide applications the department deemed discriminatory, citing the Privacy Act. Instead, she provided examples of specific provisions drawn from long applications.
The provisions of one application set a “diversity goal” of employing eight non-white counselors out of a total of 24. Additional lines of applications included training for mental health professionals, including helping counselors “ethically support diverse communities by the spread of systematic injustice, anti-racism, and white supremacy.”
Another highlighted the importance of handling “racial stress and trauma” among students. Training for one applicant included understanding “the impact of racism and white privilege on educational practices.”
The cancellation of the grant was previously reported by the Associated Press.
Sen. Christopher S. Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat, said he helped negotiate the law, but said it was illegal for the president to suspend funds approved by Congress and asked Republican supporters to stand up for the law. Three Republican senators, John Cornyn of Texas, Susan Collins of Maine, and Tom Tillis of North Carolina, who wrote a column supporting the law three years ago, did not return calls for comment.
“I'm living this, I've been sitting in the room for a long time, so I'm negotiating a really sensitive compromise on a really difficult issue,” Murphy said in an interview. “What is the point of being in Congress and writing the law if the president can ignore them? So I'm mad that my Republican partners aren't disputing what the president is doing.”
Christopher Loufo, a conservative activist who led the attack on critical racial theory and diversity, equity and inclusion programs, posted screenshots on social media this week for several grant applications.
“There's no more slash funds for activists under the guise of mental health,” Rufo wrote.
But Mary Wall, former deputy director involved in setting up the process of seeking bids for the program under the Biden administration, said it was a “coarse overstep” to identify mental health services with child radicalization.
The application process supported a program that reflected the communities they served, she said. For example, programs aimed at training mental health professionals primarily for minority communities have undergone special consideration if training could demonstrate how the training aims at professionals with similar backgrounds. Wall said it was a “common sense practice” and a proven result.
“One of the first questions after the shooting at all schools is whether students have access to mental health support and services,” Wall said. “By taking away this support, we don't say we pose a risk of harm to the school community or students.”
