Two advocacy organizations are asking the U.S. Department of Education to investigate what they describe as race-based funding programs in Oregon, arguing that the state’s education agencies are using racial preferences that violate federal civil rights law and constitutional protections.
Defending Education and Do No Harm filed a joint complaint with the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights on May 28, targeting both the Oregon Department of Education and the state’s Higher Education Coordinating Commission (HECC). The groups contend that several state-funded programs distribute public money using racial criteria, which they argue runs afoul of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
At the center of the complaint is Oregon’s Charter School Equity Grant program. According to the grant criteria cited in the filing, schools may qualify if at least 65 percent of their students are either disabled or belong to racial and ethnic groups identified as having historically experienced academic disparities.
The complaint argues that such criteria effectively create race-based preferences for public funding.
“What stands out most about Oregon’s system of public school funding is the sheer blatancy of the discrimination — explicit racial quotas and race-based bonuses for distributing public funds written into Oregon law and policy,” Do No Harm Chief Medical Officer Dr. Kurt Miceli told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
The filing points to recent Supreme Court decisions emphasizing that government programs generally cannot distribute benefits based on race, even when officials cite historical disparities as justification. According to the complaint, Oregon’s policies rely on exactly the kind of reasoning the Court has increasingly scrutinized.
The groups also challenge the funding formula used by Oregon’s Higher Education Coordinating Commission. The complaint alleges that the commission distributes additional taxpayer funding to public universities based in part on the number of minority students who graduate from those institutions.
That program is particularly significant because the Public University Support Fund represents a major source of state higher education funding. According to the complaint, the fund totals approximately $1.07 billion under Oregon’s 2025–2027 budget.
Defending Education Vice President Sarah Perry argued that both programs raise serious legal concerns.
“Oregon’s Department of Education and Oregon’s Higher Education Coordinating Commission appear to be violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act by administering programs that explicitly discriminate on the basis of race,” Perry told the DCNF.
She specifically criticized the Charter School Equity Grant program, arguing that funding eligibility tied to student racial demographics resembles an unlawful quota system.
“The Commission fares no better, as it awards taxpayer funds to schools based on the number of minority students who graduate from each,” Perry added. “That kind of race essentialism is odious to the Constitution.”
Supporters of such programs generally argue that targeted funding helps address longstanding educational disparities and directs resources toward underserved populations. However, the complaint’s authors contend that efforts to promote equity cannot come at the expense of equal treatment under the law.
Miceli framed the issue as part of a broader debate over whether public institutions should prioritize equality of opportunity or race-conscious remedies designed to address historical disadvantages.
“Oregon’s use of student racial demographics to allocate public funding for K-12 schools and universities is immoral and violates the Constitution and federal antidiscrimination law,” he said.
The organizations are now asking the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights to investigate whether Oregon’s funding practices violate federal law and whether changes should be required to bring the programs into compliance.
Neither the Oregon Department of Education nor the Higher Education Coordinating Commission publicly responded to the allegations before publication. If federal officials decide to pursue the complaint, the case could become another test of how far states may go in considering race when distributing educational resources in the wake of recent Supreme Court rulings.
