Trump moves to shut down Department of Education, faces legal and political hurdles

President Donald Trump is set to sign an executive order aimed at dismantling the U.S. Department of Education, fulfilling a long-standing campaign pledge to reduce federal oversight in education. According to a White House summary seen by Reuters, the directive instructs Education Secretary Linda McMahon to take steps toward shutting down the agency and shifting control of educational programs to individual states.

The move has already sparked legal challenges, with a coalition of Democratic state attorneys general filing a lawsuit to block the department’s closure and prevent the layoffs of nearly half its staff. Civil rights groups, including the NAACP, have also criticized the order, arguing that it threatens funding for millions of students, particularly those in rural and low-income communities.

While Trump has frequently called for eliminating the Department of Education, achieving this goal will require congressional approval. The department, established in 1979, plays a critical role in administering federal education funds and overseeing key policies, including student loans, special education programs, and civil rights protections in schools.

What Does Trump’s Executive Order Say About Federal Education Policy?

The executive order directs the Education Secretary to ensure a smooth transition of services as control shifts to the states. However, it also imposes new restrictions on how federal education funds can be used. According to Reuters, any remaining Department of Education funds must not support programs that promote Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives or gender ideology. This reflects broader efforts by the Trump administration to scale back such policies across federal agencies.

Trump has long criticized the Department of Education, calling it “a big con job” that has failed to improve student outcomes despite spending more than $3 trillion since its creation. His administration argues that local governments and school districts should have greater control over education policy without federal intervention.

McMahon, speaking on SiriusXM’s “The David Webb Show,” reinforced this view, stating that the department does not directly educate students, hire teachers, or set curricula. Instead, she said, the administration aims to encourage innovation at the state level by removing federal bureaucracy.

What Legal and Political Barriers Could Prevent the Department’s Closure?

Despite Trump’s executive order, dissolving the Department of Education is not a straightforward process. The agency was created through legislation signed by President Jimmy Carter, and undoing it would require congressional approval. While Republicans currently hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate, major legislative changes such as this require 60 votes, meaning at least seven Democrats would need to support the measure—a highly unlikely scenario.

Senate Democrats have signaled strong opposition, with Senator Patty Murray condemning the move as part of what she called a “slash and burn campaign” by Trump and his allies. The lawsuit filed by attorneys general from 20 states and the District of Columbia further complicates the administration’s efforts, arguing that mass layoffs at the department will prevent it from fulfilling legally mandated responsibilities.

The lawsuit contends that McMahon lacks the authority to eliminate the agency’s core functions, including overseeing civil rights protections in education and distributing federal grants to low-income school districts. Attorneys general argue that such drastic changes require congressional approval and that Trump’s actions could violate constitutional limits on executive power.

How Could the Department’s Closure Affect Education Funding and Student Programs?

The Department of Education oversees funding for K-12 schools, higher education, and special programs, distributing billions of dollars annually to public schools and universities. One of its key functions is administering federal student loans, a responsibility that affects millions of Americans with outstanding college debt. The department currently manages a $1.6 trillion loan portfolio, making it one of the most influential financial institutions in the country.

Critics warn that eliminating the department could create uncertainty for students, school districts, and universities that rely on federal funding. The department provides grants for special education, teacher salaries, and school infrastructure improvements—resources that states may struggle to replace on their own.

Civil rights advocates also raise concerns that closing the department could weaken federal oversight of discrimination cases in education. The agency plays a central role in enforcing Title IX protections, which prohibit gender discrimination in schools, as well as policies ensuring equal access to education for students with disabilities.

What Are the Broader Implications of Shifting Education Policy to the States?

The push to transfer education policy decisions to state governments aligns with longstanding conservative arguments that local authorities are better positioned to handle school funding and curriculum choices. Supporters of decentralization argue that reducing federal oversight could lead to more innovation and flexibility in education policy.

However, experts caution that a shift toward state control could exacerbate inequalities between wealthy and low-income school districts. States with larger budgets may be able to fund education more effectively, while those with fewer resources could struggle to maintain existing programs without federal assistance.

Additionally, education policy could become increasingly fragmented, with different states implementing vastly different standards for curricula, teacher qualifications, and student assessments. This could create challenges for families who move between states and for employers seeking consistency in workforce training and education.

How Will This Play Out in Congress and the Courts?

While Trump’s executive order signals his commitment to eliminating the Department of Education, the likelihood of Congress approving its closure remains low. The Biden administration previously rejected similar proposals, and with Senate Democrats firmly opposed, any legislative action is unlikely to gain the necessary support.

The legal battle over the department’s future will likely play out in the courts over the coming months, with the lawsuit challenging Trump’s order serving as a key test of executive authority. If the courts block the department’s dissolution, Trump may seek alternative strategies, such as significantly reducing its budget or shifting responsibilities to other agencies.

For now, the executive order represents a major political statement rather than an immediate policy shift. The fate of the Department of Education will depend on how Congress, the courts, and state governments respond to this latest effort to reshape federal education policy.