When President Trump refers to “Illegal Day,” it appears he’s speaking about what he sees as sensible approaches to integrate public schools. At least, that’s the impression from the Education Department’s recent investigation into Fairfax County Public Schools.
Trump’s team claims that Fairfax County broke federal law with its admissions policies aimed at altering the demographic makeup of its top high schools. This idea, linking integration to segregation, hearkens back to Barry Goldwater’s stance. In 1964, he noted that “The Constitution is color blind” and argued against forcing children into certain schools under the guise of integration.
It seems Trump shares this view, but the Supreme Court disagrees with him.
Last year, the Court opted not to challenge the Fairfax County decision. That choice made sense, considering, even if the Court alters its position, there’s a long history of conservative rulings, including from Chief Justice John Roberts, that accept racial goals related to diversity and inclusion.
This new investigation highlights Trump’s inclination to disregard judicial authority while criticizing the substance of these policies. Yet it also underscores that his opposition lacks both moral and legal foundations.
There’s historical context to consider. For many years, supporters of Black students have been advocating for changes related to Thomas Jefferson High School, one of the top public schools nationally. After complaints from the NAACP in 2012 regarding biased admissions against African American and Hispanic students, local leaders began to reevaluate the policies. With the rise of racial justice demonstrations in 2020, the county recognized the disparity in demographics—despite having a significant population of Black residents, few were admitted to the school. This prompted a task force to explore the reasons behind this ongoing exclusion.
After a series of hearings, the school board revamped the admissions process, eliminating a $100 application fee and standardized testing requirements. Despite ongoing criticism claiming the changes undermined “merit,” the board increased the minimum GPA from 3.0 to 3.5 and added requirements related to honors courses. The new system also included a broader evaluation, such as whether applicants qualified for free lunch or were English language learners. Additionally, it ensured that each middle school received a specific number of seats, roughly 1.5% of the eighth-grade class.
The Education Committee concluded that the new admissions criteria should utilize neutral methods that do not aim to achieve any set racial or ethnic makeup. Hence, admissions officers won’t know the race, ethnicity, gender, or name of the applicants.
The results from this revamped process are promising. In its first year, Thomas Jefferson High School saw a significant uptick, with 1,000 more applicants than in the previous cycle, including a greater number of low-income students, English learners, and girls compared to previous years. Notably, the average GPA of accepted students also increased.
Furthermore, the new admissions method has led to greater racial diversity. Black students accounted for 10% of applicants, receiving nearly 8% of offers, while Hispanic students made up 11%, with over 11% receiving offers as well. Though the percentage of Asian American students declined, they maintained the highest admit rates among all groups. Additionally, there was a marked increase in offers to historically underrepresented Asian American students, with low-income Asian American applicants rising from one to 51 since 2020.
In essence, Thomas Jefferson High School has adopted a “racially neutral” admissions approach aimed at enhancing representation for Black and Hispanic students. This practice is what the Trump administration labels as part of an “illegal day.”
Efforts towards racial diversity fall under the DEI umbrella but aren’t illegal. In fact, the recent Supreme Court ruling regarding student admissions at Harvard aligns more favorably with many DEI policies that Trump is currently criticizing.
Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Roberts acknowledged Harvard’s goals as “worthy.” Judge Brett Kavanaugh made a compelling point, asserting that while racism persists, universities are permitted to take action against its effects without relying on racial classifications.
Interestingly, the strategies being implemented at Thomas Jefferson reflect Kavanaugh’s appeal for policies that consider race without classifying students based on it. This might sidestep the Education Department’s investigation into Fairfax County, but it doesn’t deter Trump’s ongoing campaign against integration.
The Pacific Legal Foundation, which has filed a lawsuit against Fairfax County, aims to resurrect a more adversarial approach to integration. Their FAQ suggests that schools should only utilize standardized tests, essays, and interviews when not motivated by racial factors. This reasoning makes it acceptable to waive fees for public relations while asserting that it would be illegal to do the same to combat racial barriers affecting low-income Black and Hispanic students.
Looking at higher education, the Pacific Legal Foundation argues that Harvard could eliminate admissions preferences for legacies and wealthy donors—but it would be illegal for them to do the same to increase Asian American representation or reduce unearned advantages for affluent white applicants.
In summary, positive actions aimed at lessening racial inequality, which Trump disparages as “illegal DEIs,” are actually lawful and ethical. Therefore, for now, integration doesn’t equate to segregation.
