WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump is set to sign an executive order on Thursday directing the dismantling of the U.S. Education Department. This action fulfills a campaign promise to eliminate an agency that has long been a target for conservatives.
Trump has criticized the Education Department, calling it wasteful and influenced by liberal ideology. However, actually dismantling the department is unlikely to be possible without Congressional approval, as it was Congress that established the department in 1979.
According to a White House fact sheet, the order will instruct Secretary Linda McMahon “to take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure (of) the Department of Education and return education authority to the States, while continuing to ensure the effective and uninterrupted delivery of services, programs, and benefits on which Americans rely.”
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated on Thursday that Trump’s action will significantly reduce the size of the department, but it will continue to manage federal student loans and Pell grants. She added that essential duties, such as civil rights enforcement, will remain, though she did not specify how they would be carried out.
Leavitt told reporters that the responsibility for educating the nation’s students will be returned to the states.
The Trump administration has already been reducing the agency’s size, halving its workforce and making substantial cuts to the Office for Civil Rights and the Institute of Education Sciences, which collects data on academic progress nationwide.
Public school advocates have warned that eliminating the department would disadvantage children within an already unequal American education system.
The National Parents Union released a statement saying that this action isn’t about improving education, but about denying millions of children a fair chance, which they vowed to fight against.
Rep. Bobby Scott of Virginia, the leading Democrat on the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, described Trump’s order as “dangerous and illegal,” arguing it would disproportionately harm low-income students, students of color, and students with disabilities.
Scott emphasized that the department was originally founded partly to ensure the enforcement of students’ civil rights, a cause opposed by those who favored public school segregation and campaigned for a return to “states’ rights.”
Supporters of Trump’s educational vision have welcomed the order.
Tiffany Justice, co-founder of Moms for Liberty, stated on social media that it would end bloated bureaucracy dictating what kids learn, and stifling innovation. She added that states, communities, and parents could take control and customize education to suit their children’s needs.
The White House has yet to officially detail which department functions might be transferred to other departments or eliminated altogether. During her confirmation hearing, McMahon stated that she would maintain essential initiatives, including Title I funding for low-income schools and Pell grants for low-income college students. She said the administration’s goal was to create “a better functioning” department.
The department distributes billions of dollars annually to schools and oversees $1.6 trillion in federal student loans.
Currently, the agency is primarily focused on managing finances, including its large student loan portfolio and various aid programs for colleges and school districts, such as school meals and support for homeless students. It also plays a crucial role in overseeing civil rights enforcement.
While states and districts already control local schools and curriculum, some conservatives advocate for eliminating the strings attached to federal funding and instead providing states with “block grants” to use at their discretion. However, block granting has raised concerns about funding for essential programs like Title I, the largest source of federal funding for K-12 schools. Families with children with disabilities have expressed concerns about the impact on the department’s work to protect their rights.
Federal funding constitutes a relatively small portion of public school budgets, about 14%. This funding often supports supplemental programs for vulnerable students, like the McKinney-Vento program for homeless students or Title I for low-income schools.
Colleges and universities are more dependent on funding from Washington, through research grants and federal financial aid that helps students afford tuition.
Republicans have discussed closing the Education Department for decades, arguing that it wastes taxpayer money and interferes in decisions that should be made by states and schools. This idea has gained traction recently as conservative parents’ groups demand more control over their children’s education.
In his platform, Trump pledged to close the department and return it to the states, where he believes it belongs. He has described the department as a haven for “radicals, zealots and Marxists” who overextend their reach through guidance and regulation.
Even as Trump aims to dismantle the department, he has relied on it to promote aspects of his agenda, using the investigative powers of the Office for Civil Rights and the threat of withdrawing federal education funding to target schools and colleges that violate his orders regarding transgender athletes, pro-Palestinian activism, and diversity programs.
Some of Trump’s allies have questioned his authority to close the agency without congressional action, and there are doubts about its political popularity. In 2023, the House considered an amendment to close the agency, but 60 Republicans joined Democrats in opposing it.
During Trump’s first term, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos attempted to significantly reduce the agency’s budget and asked Congress to consolidate all K-12 funding into block grants, giving states more flexibility in how they spend federal money. This proposal was rejected, facing opposition even from some Republicans.
Leavitt is one of three administration officials named in a lawsuit by the Associated Press on First and Fifth Amendment grounds. The AP claims the three are punishing the news agency for editorial decisions they oppose. The White House contends that the AP is not adhering to an executive order to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America.
“`