Oakland schools in hot seat over 'students of color' program while taking millions in federal funding

Federal Complaint Accuses Oakland Unified Schools of Racially Exclusive Programs

A federal civil‑rights lawsuit alleges that Oakland Unified School District (OUSD) is violating Title VI and Title IX of the Civil Rights Act by offering a federal‑funded Latinx mentoring program that excludes white students from receiving academic support, mentorship and cash incentives. The complaint was filed by the national advocacy group Defending Education (DE) and details how OUSD’s partnership with the Unity Council distributes funds and services exclusively to Latino and other students of color.

A Targeted Program

The programs at the center of the complaint are the Latino Men & Boys (LMB) initiative and its sister program, Latina Mentoring & Achievement (LMA). According to the complaint, the LMB program was first designed to serve Latino male students and later expanded to include other students of color and to offer services to all gender identities under LMA. The Unity Council, a local Oakland organization, administers the programs in selected schools, providing tutoring, mentorship, health and wellness services, and “milestones and stipends.” During the 2024‑2025 school year the Unity Council distributed roughly $3,000 in such stipends to students who qualify under the LMB program.

The complaint notes that OUSD’s 2022‑2023 service agreement with the Unity Council states the LMB program is offered to “Latino males and other students of color” and their families. The 2024‑2025 agreement similarly limits participation to “approximately two hundred Latino young men and their families.” No comparable program is offered to white OUSD students, the complaint argues, creating a discriminatory environment.

Federal Funding and Legal Allegations

OUSD receives millions in federal aid, the complaint says, and that funding carries a nondiscrimination obligation. The lawsuit contends that offering race‑specific perks through a third‑party partner violates federal law. In a statement to the filing, DE’s legal fellow Sarah Parshall Perry said, “Oakland Unified School District has forgotten that ours is a colorblind Constitution. In a ham‑fisted attempt to guarantee student ‘equity’ outcomes, Oakland USD has sponsored a multitude of programs geared toward only one race or sex in violation of federal law.”

The complaint cites Title VI, which prohibits racial discrimination in federally funded programs, and Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination. It argues that the exclusion of white students from the LMB and LMA programs constitutes both racial and sex discrimination because the programs are specifically for Latino male students and for Latinx youth generally, and no similar benefits exist for white students of any sex.

Supreme Court Framework

The lawsuit references a Supreme Court precedent that recognizes only two compelling interests that justify race‑based government action: first, “remediating specific identified instances of past discrimination that violated the Constitution or a statute,” and second, “avoiding imminent and serious risks to human safety in prisons, such as a race riot.” DE’s complaint notes that the LMB and LMA programs do not meet either of these narrowly defined interests and therefore are unlawful.

Unity Council’s Mission and Claims

The Unity Council’s website describes its initiatives as “school‑based, culturally rooted programs located in selected schools in the Oakland Unified School District.” It claims the programs “significantly increase graduation rates for Latinx youth in Oakland schools and promote healthy lifestyles, academic focus and leadership development.” It also states that the programs are available to male‑identified, female‑identified, and non‑binary youth.

No Response Yet

Neither OUSD nor the Unity Council responded to requests for comment from Fox News Digital, the outlet that first reported the complaint. The lawsuit, filed exclusively to Fox News Digital, was not publicly filed until recently, according to the complaint’s own timeline.

Implications for the District

If the court sides with Defending Education, OUSD could be required to either open the programs to all students or eliminate the race‑specific components. The lawsuit highlights a broader national debate about how schools can address historic inequities while complying with federal nondiscrimination laws. For OUSD, the case raises questions about how its federally funded initiatives are structured and whether they inadvertently create new barriers for white students.

Looking Forward

The federal complaint remains pending, and it is unclear how quickly OUSD or the Unity Council will respond or what remedial steps, if any, will be taken. The case underscores the complexity of designing equity programs within the constraints of Title VI and Title IX, and it may set a precedent for other districts with similarly targeted initiatives. For now, the question remains: can Oakland’s efforts to support Latinx students be reconciled with a strict interpretation of federal anti‑discrimination statutes?