A new legal challenge backed by the group responsible for ending affirmative action in college admissions is targeting federal funding for Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs), continuing an aggressive legal strategy to dismantle race-conscious policies in higher education.
On June 12, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti and Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA), the conservative organization led by activist Edward Blum, filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education. The suit challenges the constitutionality of the Hispanic-Serving Institutions Program, which provides federal grants to colleges where at least 25% of the student body is Hispanic.
Skrmetti and SFFA claim the program’s eligibility requirements are discriminatory and constitute an unconstitutional use of federal power. “A federal grant system that openly discriminates against students based on ethnicity isn’t just wrong and un-American—it’s unconstitutional,” Skrmetti said in a statement.
The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, argues that schools in the state are effectively excluded from accessing millions of dollars in federal support simply because they do not meet the specific racial threshold. It asserts the policy violates the equal protection guarantees of the Fifth Amendment and echoes arguments that led to the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision banning race-based admissions practices at Harvard and the University of North Carolina—also brought by SFFA.
The HSI program, established under Titles III and V of the Higher Education Act, is designed to bolster educational access and outcomes for Hispanic and low-income students by providing funding for infrastructure, academic support, and STEM programming. In FY 2024, Congress allocated over $228 million to the Developing Hispanic-Serving Institutions Program alone.
Critics of the lawsuit argue that it misconstrues the intent and impact of the program. The funding supports institutions that serve historically underrepresented communities, not by excluding others, but by addressing longstanding gaps in access and resources. Many higher education advocates warn that undermining such programs under the guise of “colorblindness” threatens equity-driven efforts vital to closing opportunity gaps.
Still, Blum, as president of SFFA, maintains that the government should not “deny opportunity because they fall on the wrong side of an ethnic quota.”
The case, State of Tennessee v. U.S. Department of Education (No. 3:25-cv-270), represents the latest front in an escalating legal effort to roll back policies aimed at fostering diversity and inclusion in higher education.
