President Donald Trump is renewing his long-standing campaign promise to abolish the U.S. Department of Education, prepared to initiate the process through the drafting of an executive order. This ambitious move, characterized by his administration as aiming to return educational control to the states, emerges amid serious challenges from Congress and public educators alike.
The executive order is expected to not only direct Education Secretary Linda McMahon to begin formulating plans for the department's wind-down but also to explicitly call on Congress for legislative support to permanently dismantle it. Trump recently quipped, "I want Linda to put herself out of a job," underscoring the dramatic shift he proposes for federal educational oversight.
Since the inception of the Education Department during President Jimmy Carter's administration, many have criticized its operations, alleging wasteful spending and federal overreach. Trump himself has often labeled the department infiltrated by “radicals, zealots, and Marxists,” asserting it contributes to the decline of U.S. educational performance, which he claims is ranked among the lowest globally. “We spend more per pupil than any other country in the world, and we’re ranked at the bottom of the list,” he stated, advocating for state control over schools.
The proposed executive order follows years of discussions and failed attempts by Republicans to either eliminate or merge the Education Department with other federal agencies, including notable initiatives during Trump’s first term. Even with Republican control of Congress, past efforts witnessed limited traction. The most recent legislative moves toward closing the agency—brought forth by Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Kentucky, who introduced legislation proposing the department "shall terminate on December 31, 2026"—help highlight the divide within the party on this contentious issue.
Critics, including educators and lawmakers from both sides, express serious concerns about the ramifications of such drastic measures. A vocal opponent, Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association, vehemently warned of the potential fallout: "If it became a reality, Trump’s power grab would steal resources for our most vulnerable students, explode class sizes, cut job training programs, make higher education more expensive and out of reach for middle class families, take away special education services for students with disabilities, and gut student civil rights protections."
Further complicATING this narrative, state-level Democrats fear the loss of federal funding could freeze educational resources at the federal level. Minnesota’s Sen. Mary Kunesh articulated this anxiety succinctly: "Imagine if we have billions of dollars frozen at the federal level. How are we going to make sure they have the curriculum they have to learn?" This balance of support and opposition highlights just how polarizing the issue remains.
While Trump's approach reflects broader Republican sentiments advocating for reduced federal involvement, substantial legislative support remains uncertain. Even with the GOP citing cleaning out the Education Department as part of its platform, the reality is stark. Major educational federal assistance programs, including Title I funding for low-income schools and federal student loans, are anchored by longstanding federal legislation. Dismantling such frameworks would require significant legislative backing—a challenge faceable only through bipartisan cooperation.
The proposed executive movement aligns with the broader Republican agenda advocating for school choice and educational autonomy, gaining traction among party candidates including early presidential contenders. Yet, the practicalities of executing such sweeping changes may prove cumbersome. Even if Trump successfully diminishes the department, there exists the probability of redistributing resources and responsibilities among other governmental agencies previously tasked with education prior to 1979.
Yet the administration’s continual efforts to dismantle programs associated with diversity, equity, and inclusion—culminated by recent paid administrative leave for some 60 Education Department employees—raise alarm bells among advocates who view these measures as detrimental. Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, openly challenged the rationale behind Trump’s proposals, indicating her willingness to hold discussions, emphasizing, “We’d be happy to have a conversation with the new president.”
Despite all these discussions and pushback from educators, the White House remains steadfast. Reports indicate the need for collaboration with Congress, particularly with the teachers’ unions from which Trump has sought guidance. Given the persistent divided viewpoints on the direction of federal education, any sweeping actions faced with resistance would risk considerable delays and confusion.
Inevitably, Trump's quest to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education raises pivotal questions about how such changes could reverberate through the nation's educational fabric and impact funding, access, and quality for future generations of students. With numerous stakeholders weighing their influence and negotiating their positions, the ultimate fate of the department remains uncertain.