Field trip for St. Paul 'students of color' canceled after discrimination complaint filed
The field trip
The incident in question was a field trip planned for some students at Highland Park Senior High School to a Minneapolis marketing agency that was supposed to take place Thursday. The field trip description said it was open to 11th and 12th graders who "identify as a student of color."
The concern
Mark Perry, a retired university professor, said over the past five years or so, he has filed nearly 1,000 complaints for alleged discrimination at universities, colleges, and schools that receive federal funding across the country.
Perry said his complaints focus on alleged violations of Title IX, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex. And in this case, he alleges a violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin.
School takes immediate action
Perry said within hours of contacting the school about this matter, he received a message back that the field trip had been canceled.
"They maybe should have understood that this was a problem before, but at least once it was brought to their attention, that's the least I can expect then that they would do the right thing and comply with federal civil rights laws. Which in this case, was canceling the program or I guess maybe it was too late to open it up to all student," said Perry.
School district responds
A spokesperson for St. Paul Public Schools said it had partnered with a non-profit organization that provides programs like this one.
"Saint Paul Public Schools values our partnerships with community organizations like The BrandLab and the opportunities they provide for our students. The district remains committed to providing post-secondary and career-related opportunities for all of our students to pursue their passions," said Erica Wacker, district spokesperson for St. Paul Public Schools.
What's next
Perry said he will withdraw the complaint.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
2 days ago
- Forbes
Columbia, Dartmouth, And The Politics Shaping College Admissions
Low Memorial Library and Quad, Columbia University, New York City, New York, USA. (Photo by: ... More Photographer name/Education Images/Universal Images Group via Getty Images) The 2025-2026 Common Application will launch on August 1, 2025, marking the official start of an increasingly politicized admissions cycle. This year, families are weighing more than rankings and acceptance rates. With elite universities facing federal investigations, many parents, administrators, students, and applicants are asking: How will the political climate affect application decisions, and what kind of campus experience can students expect upon arrival? Title VI Investigations Intensify Political Pressures on Campus In May 2024, the Biden administration reported that it had opened investigations into 100 higher education institutions for violations of the 1964 Title VI Act, alleging instances of antisemitism on college campuses. Now, over a year later, the Trump administration has deployed Title VI against sixty different higher education institutions, this time for infractions relating to the abolition of DEI initiatives countrywide, as well as for select cases of antisemitism. But whereas the Biden administration leveraged a cooperative approach with universities, supporting internal assessment and adjustment, the Trump administration has taken a more forceful approach. According to Forbes contributor Michael T. Nietzel, some elite institutions have experienced what he describes as 'painful' consequences following coercive 'federal shakedowns.' As a result of these conflicts, prospective students, domestic and international, face new and unexpected hurdles as they consider schools that were, just a short time ago, no-brainers for most applicants. Columbia's Settlement: A Price for Compliance On July 23, 2025, Columbia University agreed to pay $200 million to the federal government and begin submitting compliance reports to an externally appointed administrator. While the Columbia declined to admit any wrongdoing, the university pledged to 'reform' its approach to antisemitism through enhanced safety measures on campus. The university framed the settlement as part of a wider effort to reinstate hundreds of millions of dollars in frozen federal funding and restore its ability to apply for regular federal funding opportunities, but current students, alumni, and prospective applicants may view Columbia's decision differently. Zooming out, this settlement may be just the beginning. Harvard, too, remains under investigation for 'allowing anti-Semitic harassment and discrimination to persist unchecked,' and the Department of Education has threatened to review its accreditation. Unlike Columbia's conciliatory approach, Harvard has responded to these new threats, along with $2 billion worth of federal funding cuts, by suing the administration. While some prominent voices have praised Harvard's response, prospective students may be concerned about the potential ramifications of this ongoing dispute. For Families, Culture Is Now a Key Filter As families plan college visits and students weigh whether or not to apply to their top-choice school in the binding Early Decision round, questions about the broader culture and ethical commitments of each institution are taking on a new urgency. In the past, this type of scrutiny often focused on state politics. For instance, some prospective students have reportedly avoided universities in Florida or Texas due to legislation impacting classroom content and restrictive abortion laws. Now, though, cultural and political concerns have shifted from the local environment to individual institutions themselves, even those in traditionally progressive states. For example, both the University of Pennsylvania and the University of California, Berkeley are facing heightened scrutiny for their responses to campus protests and federal investigations. Meanwhile, institutions in red states, like the University of Kentucky and Tulane University, have also drawn attention from the Trump administration, specifically for their affiliation with the 'Ph.D. Project,' a nonprofit organization that supports students from underrepresented backgrounds. It's still too early in the admissions cycle to know whether these dynamics will significantly shift application numbers. But one thing is clear: families are increasingly weighing brand alignment alongside more traditional concerns like rankings, costs, and location. Ivy League schools, in particular, are being compared based on cultural and political identity. Just as consumers might think twice about supporting a company based on its social stances—whether that's buying a Patagonia vest or eating at Chick-fil-A—students and parents are using college selection to express values and identity. What These Federal Crackdowns Mean for Campus Life When assessing colleges, students and families should consider how increased administrative oversight may directly shape campus life. The impact will vary widely depending on a student's identity, field of study, and the kind of college experience they're seeking. STEM-focused undergraduate students, and graduate students in all fields, are most likely to feel the effects of the Trump administration's funding cuts because they will directly impact research and teaching assistant opportunities. For example, the $2 billion removed from Harvard University's budget threatens a number of high-profile medical and scientific studies. And in March 2025, the University of Pennsylvania lost a significant source of funding when Trump issued an executive order that affected the National Institute of Health's revenue and found itself in the awkward position of having to rescind graduate student offers. Indeed, it's telling that Columbia's Office of the President cited federal grant eligibility as a key reason for agreeing to the administration's demands. Students who claim a minority identity and/or are not U.S. citizens will need to research individual school policies as well as any current pending legal action on the part of the administration. Harvard's quarrel with Trump is the extreme example: in March, the administration revoked the university's ability to grant travel visas, though Harvard's deal with the University of Toronto may circumvent this issue for now. Students seeking identity-based communities on campus will need to stay informed about current school policies that may affect these organizations and affinity groups. Currently, universities are unclear about whether they will be able to provide financial support to clubs that specify a membership identity, such as those affiliated with the University of Michigan's Office for Multi-Ethnic Student Affairs. At elite institutions, students may feel increased scrutiny, not only from the press but also from within their universities. If other schools follow Columbia's lead in appointing an external monitor, it could signal broader shifts in how disciplinary matters and protests are handled—something to consider for socially minded prospective students. Increased oversight may also change how student data is handled: many of the universities under investigation, including Columbia, the University of Virginia, and George Mason University, have been asked to hand over international student and disciplinary records. Prospective students with infractions on their record or who are not U.S. citizens may need to consider how this increased oversight could affect them directly. The silver lining to this instability could be a diversification in where top students choose to apply and ultimately study. Families looking for a top-tier education without the harsh glare of the national spotlight are considering the 'New Ivies,' small liberal arts colleges, or Canadian options like the University of Toronto or the University of British Columbia, which have seen a notable rise in U.S. applicants. Dartmouth: A Contrast with Columbia Dartmouth College Admissions Office in Hanover, New Hampshire. (Photo by) While many colleges and universities nationwide are feeling the effects of mounting federal oversight, Columbia and Dartmouth offer two of the most visible and contrasting case studies to make headlines this month. Under President Sian Beilock, Dartmouth College has adopted a policy of 'institutional restraint,' emphasizing that administrators should speak on behalf of the college only sparingly. The approach draws on the University of Chicago's 1967 Kalven Report, which argued that universities should refrain from taking public stances on political issues to protect academic freedom and viewpoint diversity. Dartmouth, dubbed the 'Ivy League's Switzerland,' has declined to join peer institutions in signing public letters condemning recent federal actions related to higher education. This includes a widely circulated April 2025 statement opposing what academic leaders described as 'unprecedented government overreach.' Beilock and her administration have framed Dartmouth's decision not as a political endorsement but as an effort to preserve dialogue across perspectives. While praised by some as a strategic move to avoid federal sanctions and preserve campus continuity, Dartmouth's choice has also drawn critique. 'Dartmouth's stance of 'institutional restraint' is a double-edged sword for prospective students and their families,' says Maria Laskaris, Senior Private Counselor at Top Tier Admissions and former Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid at Dartmouth College. 'Some may appreciate the focus on academic freedom and diverse viewpoints, but others will see the new policy as a lack of engagement on critical societal issues. Either way, the policy likely influences their perception of the College's values and alignment with their own.' For many prospective students, Dartmouth's approach to this political moment will shape not only whether they apply, but how they imagine their place within its community. The Bottom Line for Applicants For students and families navigating a high-stakes, emotionally charged admissions process, these developments represent yet another curveball. What does a school's public stance, or strategic silence, say about the campus experience it offers? Whose voices are protected—or policed—once students arrive? This application cycle, students are being asked to weigh not just where they'll thrive academically, but what kind of institutional culture they're stepping into and how that decision will reflect on them.
Fox News
2 days ago
- Fox News
Trans bathroom policies have 10 days to go, Trump Education Department warns 5 Virginia school districts
The Department of Education is giving five northern Virginia school districts ten days to fix their transgender bathroom policies or face "enforcement action," the agency said Friday. Public school districts in Loudoun County, Fairfax County, Prince William County, Alexandria City and Arlington were all found to be in violation of Title IX after an investigation by the Education Department's Office of Civil Rights that began in February, according to a press release shared Friday. The release cited a June ruling by the Supreme Court, which the department said acknowledged that a person's identification as "transgender" is distinct from a person's biological sex. "The investigation was based on complaints alleging that the [school districts] have similar anti-discrimination policies pertaining to 'transgender-identifying' students, which violate the sex-based protections of Title IX," the release said. "The [districts] are also the subject of several lawsuits, informal complaints and reports, which allege that students in the (districts) avoid using school restrooms whenever possible because of the schools' policies and that female students have witnessed male students inappropriately touching other students and watching female students change in a female locker room." Craig Trainor, the Department of Education's acting assistant secretary for civil rights, blasted the Biden administration for tolerating such behavior, adding it's time for "northern Virginia's experiment with radical gender ideology" to come to an end. The Education Department's non-compliance finding prompted the agency to issue a proposed resolution agreement whereby each school district can take corrective action to prevent any enforcement actions by the Trump administration. That action would require the districts to rescind any policies or regulations allowing students to access bathrooms, locker rooms or other intimate facilities on the basis of their preferred gender identity as opposed to their biological sex. The districts will also be required under the agreement to issue letters to each school it oversees within its district, explaining that any future policies related to bathrooms, locker rooms or other intimate spaces must separate students on the basis of sex and not gender identity. The districts would also be compelled under the agreement to adopt "biology-based definitions" of the words "male" and "female" to be used in all practices and policies. The Department of Education gave the school districts 10 days to voluntarily agree to these demands or risk "imminent" consequences, including a potential referral to the Department of Justice. "Today, we at Defending Education are incredibly gratified to learn that a group of Northern Virginia School Districts — many of which were ground zero for the social experimentation of transgender 'inclusion' in women's sports, bathrooms and private spaces — are now facing the music for failing to adhere to the plain text and meaning of Title IX," said Sarah Parshall Perry, vice president and legal fellow at Defending Education. "As a mother, as a Virginian and as former senior counsel to the assistant secretary for civil rights at the U.S. Department of Education, I am encouraged to see that this administration is taking the enforcement of long-standing civil rights laws seriously," Perry continued. "Title IX was passed to guarantee women's educational equality in its myriad manifestations. But intransigent schools in the commonwealth seem to have forgotten that." The school districts all confirmed receipt of the resolution agreements issued to them by the Department of Education and are conducting a review to determine next steps. They all also expressed a commitment to following federal and state laws while simultaneously fostering a welcoming, inclusive and supportive environment for students.
Epoch Times
2 days ago
- Epoch Times
Trump Admin Launches Federal Probe Into Oregon Policies Allowing Male Participation in Girls' Sports
The Department of Education's civil rights office has opened an investigation into Oregon's policies allowing transgender-identifying male students to compete in female athletics based on a 'gender identity' participation policy. The Education Department said in a July 25 press release that its Office for Civil Rights is examining whether the Oregon Department of Education (ODE) is violating Title IX, the federal law barring sex discrimination in education programs that receive federal funds.
