Diversity, equity and inclusion programs are banned in Utah’s K-12 schools under a state law approved in 2024. However, some Utah State Board of Education members still wanted to send a strong message against any “practices” that might remain.
A proposed board resolution — requested by Republican board members Christina Boggess, Cole Kelley, Joann Brinton, Rod Hall and Emily Green — claimed DEI programs are attempting to achieve “Soviet policy goals” and are tied to Marxism. It also implied that DEI is the same as critical race theory, an academic framework that originates from law schools and is not taught in Utah schools.
The resolution failed to get the support of the full board during an April 3 meeting. The vote was 4-10. Some board members opposed the content of the resolution, while others were against the approach.
It is, however, in line with the attitude taken so far in President Donald Trump’s second term. His administration has taken strong stands against DEI. That includes a letter from the U.S. Department of Education telling schools they had to certify they have eliminated DEI practices or else lose funding.
Despite state law, the draft resolution claimed that “many facets of DEI are still present and active in our schools, trainings, USBE rules and auxiliary items.” No specifics were given in the document or the meeting. The resolution would have directed the state board, school districts and schools to quickly disband any DEI practices.
Unlike board rules, resolutions are not enforceable and have no teeth. They are statements that are supported by a board majority.
Several members noted they had received hundreds of messages from constituents about the resolution. Members of the public who spoke during the meeting largely opposed it and some were confused about what programs it was targeting. Some board members were also unsure what the document was trying to do.
“Although I do worry about compliance of law, and I think our schools are working really hard to comply with the law, I don't believe that the resolution is the right approach,” board member Amanda Bollinger said. “When we have a few that are non-compliant, it doesn't mean that we need to blast everybody. And so I would prefer for us to spend our time, actually, you know, addressing specific concerns, if that is the case, instead of a blatant statement.”
Board member Randy Boothe said his constituents in Utah County feel like they are complying with the law and if they’re not, he said the board should be giving clear, explicit guidance and instructions about what they should be doing differently. For board member Jennie Earl, the resolution didn’t make things clearer for community members, it just created more confusion.
There were also concerns if the board was even allowed to pass a resolution like this.
Legal counsel said it would be a policy violation if the board passed a resolution mandating action, instead of going through its rule-making process.
With a law already in place, board member Sarah Reale saw the resolution as a waste of time.
“There are better things that we could be working on right now,” she said.
The members who stood strongly behind the resolution, like Boggess, said not passing it would give a “proverbial middle finger to the Legislature.” She said the resolution would affirm the law.
Kelley, who originally backed the resolution, had concerns over “misunderstandings” out there, including community members who worried the resolution would harm the Latinos in Action program. Hall, who also initially backed the resolution, said he was not comfortable with its language and wanted time to work on it. However, an attempt to postpone the vote to May failed.
In the end, only Brinton, Boggess, Hall and Green voted in favor.
Another Utah State Board of Education agenda item that was anticipated by the public was a proposed letter to federal leaders stating the board's belief that education should be controlled at the local and state level, and not by the federal government. The letter said the board was supportive of the Trump administration’s efforts to move federal education funding to the states. While changes were made to the letter, it also did not pass during the meeting.
