Федеральный судья запретил администрации Трампа использовать расовые критерии при распределении грантов на цифровую инклюзию

Trending A federal judge in July gave digital equity advocates a partial victory against President Donald Trump, stopping his attempt to unilaterally kill a multibillion-dollar grant program Congress created. But U.S. District Judge John D. Bates, in a 35-page opinion, also agreed with the administration that it was unconstitutional for the government to use race or ethnicity as the basis to award money under a program created to expand internet skills and access. "It was definitely disappointing," said Angela Siefer, executive director of the National Digital Inclusion Alliance, a nonprofit that filed suit last year after not receiving a nearly $26 million award meant to bolster digital and internet skills nationwide. "With this administration it's really worrisome." Congress passed the $2.75 billion Digital Equity Act in 2021 as the skill development component of a multilayered "Internet for All" initiative under President Joe Biden's signature infrastructure law, which also included a bigger pot of money for expanding internet infrastructure. A few months into his second term, Trump directly attacked the Digital Equity Act on social media, pledging "no more woke handouts" and calling the program "illegal." The language echoed two Trump executive orders characterizing diversity, equity, and inclusion programs as illegal. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration, which oversees implementation of the law, responded by abruptly halting Digital Equity Act grant programs, leaving states and organizations like the National Digital Inclusion Alliance in limbo. In response to Bates' decision, federal attorneys said the government would reinstate the NDIA-related competitive grant program without racial classification. The government will target releasing a new grant application in December, according to a joint status report filed in the case. The NDIA now must reapply for the grant award, which was slated to be disbursed among more than a dozen organizations and tribes, including the Cherokee Nation in Oklahoma, El Centro Hispano in Arkansas, Portland Community College in Oregon, and Community Service Programs of West Alabama. The grants are meant to go toward digital navigator programs, in which community workers teach technology and internet skills, according to the NDIA. In western Ohio, Jamie Huber said her organization was a subrecipient of the NDIA grant funds. Huber, director of community services at the Northwestern Ohio Community Action Commission, said that without the funding, she is left searching for money to continue navigator programs such as one she runs for people who are unemployed, homeless, or both. "How do you find a home? Well, you got to look online. And how do you find a job? You have to look online," Huber said. Huber's digital navigators also teach internet skills at 10 senior centers in rural counties stretching along the corner of Ohio bordering Michigan and Indiana. They help active older adults learn how to go online to pay bills and get healthcare, so they "continue having agency over their own life," Huber said. Rural residents live sicker and die younger on average than people in the rest of the country when they live in counties lacking high-speed internet access and healthcare, an analysis by KFF Health News found. At Computer Reach in western Pennsylvania, Executive Director Dave Sevick said his organization has cut staff and programs. He said the nonprofit, which started in 2001, has refurbished more than 24,000 computers, giving them away to families it finds through schools and churches. "We're aware that affordability is the biggest issue around, and this doesn't make it any better for folks," Sevick said. "We're helping a little bit by getting a free computer out to people." The Digital Equity Act lists exactly whom the money should benefit, including low-income households, older people, some incarcerated people, rural Americans, veterans, and members of racial or ethnic minority groups. According to 2025 polling by the Pew Research Center, people in rural communities were less likely to have internet subscriptions compared with their urban and suburban counterparts. The Pew Research polling also revealed that home broadband use among Black and Hispanic adults lagged that of white and Asian adults. While 81% of white adults surveyed said they subscribed to broadband at home, only 71% of Black adults and 68% of Hispanic adults said the same. In court, lead federal attorney Patrick Butler argued that Congress failed to prove a compelling government interest when including the racial or ethnic criteria. Congress did not "identify anything close to" a specific instance of discrimination in the broadband industry, Butler said, according to the transcript. Butler then surprised the court, saying that if the racial or ethnic status could be severed from the law, "we would obviously apply the grant program without considering race." In his opinion severing the race factor, Bates wrote that the court agreed that "the President lacks the power to cancel laws passed by Congress based on his bald disagreement with Congress's policy determinations." Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), a primary sponsor of the law, said she will be "watching very carefully to ensure this administration does what Congress intended." "It is indisputable that these challenges are particularly pronounced in low income, rural, and Tribal communities -- and there's a reason Democrats and Republicans across the country support this program so strongly," Murray said in a statement to KFF Health News. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) voted against Biden's infrastructure bill in 2021 and sent a letter to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration in late 2024 asking the agency to pause the $1.25 billion competitive grants program, arguing the use of racial classifications "does not serve a compelling governmental interest." Cruz did not respond to requests for comment. Arielle Roth, administrator of the agency, previously worked as telecommunications policy director for the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee's majority staff under Cruz. She was appointed by Trump to lead the agency. In June, during a House committee hearing, Roth had multiple tense exchanges with Democrats who took issue with changes to the Biden-era infrastructure law's internet deployment program, which now allows more satellite services rather than prioritizing fiber-optic cable lines. Lawmakers also asked about the Digital Equity Act's grant programs. "Communities across the country deserve a clear answer and a path forward," Rep. Nanette Barragan (D-Calif.) said during the hearing. While the National Digital Inclusion Alliance's lawsuit does not include the state grants, Barragan asked how those grants would be rolled out, considering the federal judge's decision on race. California was awarded a $70 million state capacity grant. Earlier this year, the Justice Department sent a letter to Congress asserting that the state grant and the competitive grant program both are illegally based on race, citing the Supreme Court's decision invalidating affirmative action in higher education admissions. Roth declined to answer Barragan's question, noting there is active litigation. Barragan said she was "extremely" frustrated by "some of the responses or nonresponses." Stephen Yusko, a spokesperson with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, declined to comment or respond to questions for this article. The government and the National Digital Inclusion Alliance agreed to pause court proceedings to give the agency time to reinstate the competitive grant program. The NDIA has also proposed that the agency provide status reports every 30 days during the court pause "to ensure prompt attention to reinstatement," according to the most recent court filing. "We need to make sure it's all moving forward," Siefer said. ------ KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF -- the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.