A recent federal court decision in National Digital Inclusion Alliance v. Trump has generated significant discussion across the broadband, digital inclusion, and community development sectors. While many headlines have focused on the court’s finding that part of the Digital Equity Act is unconstitutional, the more important takeaway for communities across Michigan is what the court did not do.

The court did not invalidate the Digital Equity Act. It did not eliminate the Competitive Grant Program. It did not eliminate the Capacity Grant Program. Instead, the court determined that the provision of the Digital Equity Act allowing race or ethnicity to be considered when evaluating grant activities fails constitutional scrutiny. The court then held that this provision is severable from the remainder of the law. In other words, the problematic provision can be removed while the rest of the Digital Equity Act remains operational. The court further noted that the federal government represented its intention to restore the Competitive Grant Program once this determination was made. 1

For those of us working in rural communities, this distinction matters.

What Severability Means

In plain language, severability means the court removed one component of the statute without striking down the entire law.

Think of it as replacing a failed component in a network rather than decommissioning the entire network. The infrastructure remains. The mission remains. The services remain. One element has been removed, but the system continues to function.

The court specifically found that the Digital Equity Act can continue to operate because the statute contains multiple categories of covered populations beyond race or ethnicity, including:

  • Individuals living in covered households
  • Older adults
  • Veterans
  • Individuals with disabilities
  • Individuals with language barriers
  • Rural residents
  • Other historically underserved populations

The court concluded that these remaining provisions provide a sufficient basis for the programs to continue operating. 1

Why This Matters for Michigan

Much of Michigan’s digital inclusion strategy has never been solely about demographic classifications. It has been about addressing real-world barriers to participation in the modern economy.

Those barriers are especially visible in regions like Michigan’s Eastern Upper Peninsula, where communities face challenges associated with geography, distance, aging populations, workforce transitions, healthcare access, and digital skills development.

For organizations working throughout rural Michigan, the strongest arguments for continued investment remain intact:

  • Rural broadband adoption
  • Community technology support
  • Digital skills development
  • Workforce readiness
  • Telehealth enablement
  • Accessibility for individuals with disabilities
  • Support for older adults
  • Community-based digital navigation

These needs did not disappear because of a court decision. If anything, the decision reinforces the importance of documenting these challenges through objective community data and measurable outcomes rather than relying on demographic classifications alone. 1

Community Capacity in Action: The EUPConnect Collaborative

For the EUPConnect Collaborative, this conversation has never been solely about broadband infrastructure, grant programs, or technology deployment. EUPConnect was created around a broader belief: that rural communities prosper when they have the capacity to identify opportunities, align resources, cultivate partnerships, and participate fully in the modern economy.

The Collaborative’s mission is to strengthen the Eastern Upper Peninsula through the development of digital infrastructure, technology-enabled education, workforce development, community data resources, and regional partnerships. Broadband is an essential foundation, but it is only one component of a larger ecosystem that includes people, institutions, knowledge, and local leadership.

That mission becomes especially important in light of the court’s decision. The ruling shifts attention away from demographic classifications and back toward measurable community needs and outcomes. For rural regions such as the Eastern Upper Peninsula, those needs remain substantial. Geographic isolation, aging populations, workforce transitions, healthcare accessibility, digital skills development, and technology adoption continue to represent barriers to full participation in the digital economy.

The court’s ruling does not diminish those challenges. Instead, it reinforces a principle that EUPConnect has long embraced: community transformation is most durable when investments are grounded in local capacity, documented need, and measurable outcomes.

Measuring Opportunity: The Digital Opportunities Intelligence Network (DOIN)

One of the lessons emerging from this case is the importance of evidence.

If future digital opportunity investments are increasingly evaluated through objective demonstrations of need and impact, communities will require better ways to measure their progress. This is one of the motivations behind the Digital Opportunities Intelligence Network (DOIN).

DOIN is being developed as an open, community-centered policy learning machine designed to measure and understand digital opportunity across communities. Rather than focusing solely on infrastructure availability, DOIN seeks to examine the broader conditions that shape participation in modern society: connectivity, digital skills, workforce readiness, education, healthcare access, economic vitality, institutional capacity, and community aspiration.

At its core, DOIN is intended to help answer a simple but important question:

How do we know whether a community is becoming more capable of participating in the digital economy?

The goal is not merely to collect data. The goal is to transform information into actionable intelligence that local leaders, educators, libraries, healthcare providers, workforce agencies, and policymakers can use to make better decisions.

For communities throughout Michigan’s Eastern Upper Peninsula, this approach creates a powerful opportunity. Rather than defining communities by deficits, we can begin measuring growth, readiness, resilience, and aspiration. We can move beyond asking where broadband exists and start understanding how communities convert connectivity into opportunity.

In that sense, the future of digital opportunity may depend as much on measurement and learning as it does on infrastructure itself.

What This Means for the EUPConnect Collaborative

From the beginning, EUPConnect has focused on something larger than broadband deployment.

Our work has always been about building community capacity.

Broadband infrastructure is necessary, but infrastructure alone does not create opportunity. Opportunity emerges when residents have the skills, support systems, knowledge, confidence, and local partnerships needed to participate fully in education, healthcare, workforce development, entrepreneurship, and civic life.

Viewed through that lens, the court’s decision does not fundamentally alter EUPConnect’s mission.

In many ways, it reinforces it.

The strongest path forward is not to retreat from digital opportunity efforts. The strongest path forward is to document needs, measure outcomes, and demonstrate the ways digital infrastructure contributes to stronger communities.

That means focusing on barriers to participation:

  • Lack of digital skills
  • Lack of affordable devices
  • Limited awareness of online services
  • Workforce technology gaps
  • Telehealth adoption challenges
  • Small-business technology readiness
  • Access to trusted technical assistance

These challenges are measurable. More importantly, they are solvable.

Through initiatives such as the MITTEN grant, EUPConnect has an opportunity to continue advancing a model centered on Rural Digital Opportunity and Community Capacity Building—one that is fully aligned with the court’s determination that Digital Equity programs can continue operating while emphasizing objective community needs and outcomes rather than demographic classifications.

This approach aligns naturally with the Collaborative’s long-standing commitment to regional partnerships, evidence-based decision making, and what I often refer to as the Power of Yet. Communities should not be defined by what they currently lack. They should be understood in terms of what they have the capacity to become.

What This Means for the EUPConnect Collaborative

From the beginning, EUPConnect has focused on something larger than broadband deployment.

Our work has been about building community capacity.

Broadband infrastructure is necessary, but infrastructure alone does not create opportunity. Opportunity emerges when people have the skills, support systems, confidence, and local partnerships needed to participate fully in education, healthcare, workforce development, entrepreneurship, and civic life.

Viewed through that lens, the court’s decision does not fundamentally alter EUPConnect’s mission.

In fact, it may provide an opportunity to sharpen it.

The strongest path forward is not to retreat from digital inclusion efforts. The strongest path forward is to articulate those efforts using universal language grounded in measurable community outcomes.

Rather than focusing on categories of people, we should focus on barriers to participation:

  • Lack of digital skills
  • Lack of affordable devices
  • Limited awareness of online services
  • Workforce technology gaps
  • Telehealth adoption challenges
  • Small-business technology readiness
  • Community access to technical assistance

These are challenges that affect real people in real communities throughout the Eastern Upper Peninsula.

Digital Opportunity as Community Capacity

The term digital equity has become politically charged. The underlying work, however, remains essential.

For EUPConnect, I believe the broader and more durable framework is Digital Opportunity.

Digital Opportunity is about ensuring that individuals, families, organizations, and communities have the ability to participate fully in modern economic and civic life.

That framework aligns naturally with EUPConnect’s long-standing emphasis on:

  • Community aspiration
  • The Power of Yet
  • Workforce readiness
  • Lifelong learning
  • Community resilience
  • Data-informed decision making
  • Local leadership development

Rather than defining communities by what they lack, we define them by what they can become.

Given the court’s ruling, the EUPConnect Collaborative should continue advancing the MITTEN initiative through a framework centered on Rural Digital Opportunity and Community Capacity Building.

Priority areas should include:

Digital Navigator Services

Expand locally trusted support networks through libraries, schools, community organizations, and regional partners.

Workforce and AI Readiness

Provide training opportunities that help residents adapt to a rapidly changing digital economy.

Broadband Adoption

Focus on helping households, small businesses, and community institutions use available connectivity effectively.

Community Data and Measurement

Develop metrics that measure participation, readiness, aspiration, skills, and outcomes rather than demographic classifications alone.

Telehealth and Aging-in-Place

Support older adults and caregivers through digital skills training and technology enablement.

Local Leadership Development

Strengthen the ability of communities to design, deploy, and manage digital opportunity initiatives over the long term.

The Bigger Lesson

The most important lesson from this court decision is that community development efforts remain strongest when they are anchored in measurable need, local capacity, and community aspiration.

The court removed a provision.

It did not remove the mission.

For the EUPConnect Collaborative, the mission remains unchanged: helping communities build the skills, systems, partnerships, and confidence needed to participate fully in the digital economy.

In many ways, that has always been the work.

And it remains the work ahead.