Current Insights on Trump’s Executive Order for the Education Department
With President Trump signing an executive order aimed at dismantling the Education Department, what are the next steps? Here’s what we know so far.
- President Trump has initiated the process to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education, pending Congressional approval.
- The order faces significant opposition from Democrats and a lawsuit from a teachers’ union, complicating its implementation.
- The objective includes maintaining funding for Title I schools, students with disabilities, Pell grants, and student loans.
- If realized, the order could transfer educational authority to individual states, potentially affecting federal funding and various programs, including special education.
On Thursday, March 20, President Donald Trump signed an executive order signaling the intent to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education. However, the complete closure of a federal agency requires congressional action, leaving the exact next steps uncertain.
Per the White House, Trump has ordered Secretary of Education Linda McMahon to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education and return educational authority to the states, while ensuring continued delivery of vital services, programs, and benefits relied upon by Americans.”
A White House official acknowledged that the agency will continue its administration of “critical programs” and cannot be entirely dissolved without legislative consent. Nonetheless, it will operate on a reduced scale with fewer employees.
We explore what potential changes could mean for K-12 schools, colleges, and universities in Mississippi.
Is Trump Capable of Shutting Down the Department?
Even with the executive order in place, President Trump’s commitment to abolishing the U.S. Department of Education is not guaranteed.
The necessity for a 60-vote threshold in the Senate to enact legislation to dismantle the education department may pose a significant challenge, even though the GOP holds a majority in both chambers.
“Democrats know it’s the right decision, and I hope they’ll support it when the time comes,” Trump stated during the signing of the executive order.
Legislative passage would likely require some level of Democratic cooperation. Certain Republican lawmakers have previously expressed reservations regarding the elimination of the agency.
A prominent teachers’ union has announced plans to challenge the Trump administration’s changes in court.
“See you in court,” remarked Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, earlier this week.
Trump’s Executive Order on the Education Department
The White House asserts that the order will not completely eliminate the Education Department, but it will significantly reduce its size.
Ongoing Legislative Efforts Regarding the Department of Education
Close to 600 education-related bills have already been presented in the 2025-26 Congress, along with around 100 proposed resolutions. These bills encompass diverse objectives across the nation. A few are aimed at opposing the education department, including one for its elimination and another aimed at safeguarding it.
Representative David Rouzer (R-N.C.) tabled the States’ Education Reclamation Act of 2025 in January, aiming to dismantle the DOE and reassign its responsibilities to other agencies. It is currently referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Conversely, the Department of Education Protection Act, introduced by Representative Jahana Hayes (D-Connecticut), seeks to prevent funds from being utilized to “decentralize, reduce staffing levels, or alter responsibilities or functionalities,” referencing January 1, 2025, as the stability benchmark. This bill has also been referred to the House education committee.
Understanding the Federal Education Department
The U.S. Department of Education was established in 1979 and commenced operations in 1980, fulfilling numerous roles such as creating regulations, enforcing compliance, and allocating billions in support of public schools and college students.
The agency has historically overseen adherence to anti-discrimination laws and policies.
The Student Aid Program administers federal student loans to 43 million individuals.
The two primary aspects at risk if the U.S. Department of Education were to close are federal funding and programming.
Will This Result in the Elimination of the Education Department in My State?
No.
This change will not eliminate state agencies, such as the Mississippi Department of Education, despite some federal employees being dispersed across the nation.
Leadership of the Department of Education
On March 3, Congress confirmed Linda McMahon’s appointment as the head of the Department of Education.
She has trained to become a teacher but has never held a teaching position and served approximately a year on the Connecticut State Board of Education in 2009. Additionally, she has acted as a trustee at Sacred Heart University in Fairfield, Connecticut. Her professional experience primarily lies in business, having co-founded World Wrestling Entertainment with her husband, Vince McMahon. She also led the Small Business Administration during Trump’s last term.
McMahon is reportedly a vigorous advocate of Republican education policies, including school choice, which allows parents to utilize public funds to cover private school expenses. She has also supported the expansion of Pell grants and alternative college pathways.
Linda McMahon Addresses the Closure of the Education Department Can Only Be Executed by Congress
Trump’s nominee for education secretary confronted inquiries regarding federal funding for low-income institutions, school choice, and other relevant topics.
Anticipated Changes: Trump Assures Safety for Student Loans and Certain K-12 Funds
Most educational policymaking is already determined at the state level through legislation. For instance, states have the autonomy to select their own curriculums. Public K-12 institutions primarily rely on state legislatures and local taxes for funding.
The closure of the U.S. Department of Education does not necessarily entail the termination of federal grants. Typically, the existing federal funding for education would be redistributed among other federal departments, which would then allocate the funds to various states. Most of these funds are currently designated for public K-12 schools.
The president affirmed his intentions to “fully maintain” specific mandates across various agencies:
- Title I funding benefiting schools in areas of high poverty.
- Financing for students with mental and physical disabilities.
- Pell grants.
- Student loans.
On March 21, he indicated a desire for the Small Business Administration to manage student loan processes.
The White House stated that any remaining funding programs cannot promote “gender ideology” or ideologies of diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) originated from the Civil Rights Movement, often manifesting as policies promoting equal treatment for all, regardless of race within educational institutions and businesses.
Some federal student loan repayment programs have already been paused or modified. Income-driven repayment plans affecting millions of borrowers have been suspended.
The AFT has additionally filed a lawsuit against the DOE, claiming it is in violation of the law by restricting access to affordable student loan repayment options.
Department of Education Workforce Reduction
When Trump assumed office, the Department of Education had approximately 4,133 employees, and its workforce has been reduced by nearly half since that period.
The DOE laid off around 1,300 employees on March 11, including one from Mississippi. McMahon referred to this decision as a “first step towards eliminating perceived bureaucratic excess.”
Additionally, around 570 employees accepted the government’s buyout offer, leaving approximately 2,183 personnel.
The most substantial layoffs occurred within the Federal Student Aid office, which lost 326 employees. This office assists students with college funding and manages federal student loans and Pell grants.
The second significant layoff impact was felt in the Office for Civil Rights, which saw a loss of 243 employees. This office is tasked with safeguarding students and school employees from discrimination.
The Institute of Education Sciences has been essentially disbanded. This institute was responsible for evaluating the effectiveness of school programs on behalf of Congress, creating uncertainty regarding the government’s approach to monitoring student progress.
Since 1867, the National Center for Education Statistics operated under the IES. Its NAEP test, popularly known as the Nation’s Report Card, has been utilized since 1969 for educational assessments in the U.S.
Potential Mississippi Consequences of a Fully Closed U.S. Department of Education
Experts have speculated about the implications if the U.S. Department of Education were to close. The details remain uncertain, but the consequences may vary from minor adjustments to significant shifts.
The federal government supplies essential funding for numerous educational programs in Mississippi, though the majority of funding originates from state and local tax revenues.
For the 2024-2025 academic year, approximately $2 billion of the state’s total $5.2 billion public education budget results from federal financing, accounting for around 36% of Mississippi’s public education budget for the current school year.
Recently, the DOE instructed public institutions across the country to revoke DEI policies from all practices or risk losing federal funds. Mississippi’s publicly funded universities and colleges are currently evaluating their programs and practices under the new interpretation of civil rights laws.
In Mississippi, both the Senate and House have recently passed legislation prohibiting DEI initiatives in higher education.
Transferring greater educational control to states could place additional financial responsibilities on them, potentially leading to higher taxes for residents in Mississippi.
Reducing Federal Oversight and Programs
Abolishing the U.S. Department of Education is primarily focused on diminishing federal supervision, not necessarily eliminating federal funding. This reduction would likely result in a scaling back of federal programs and regulations affecting education.
Federal supervision of programs such as special education is a significant responsibility of the national agency. The absence of federal oversight for programs like special education does not assure the continuity of current funding.
Mississippi also heavily relies on federal funding for providing free lunch programs to children from low-income households. Under former President Barack Obama’s administration, these lunch programs were expanded, allowing districts with substantial numbers of qualifying students to offer free lunches to all children in the district.
Public Reactions to Trump’s Plan to Dismantle the Education Department
Feedback from residents in Columbia, Missouri, and New York City following President Donald Trump’s executive order targeting the dissolution of the Education Department.
Contributors: Joey Garrison, Zachary Schermele, Rachel Barber, Kinsey Crowley
For news tips, reach out to The Clarion-Ledger’s suburban reporter Mary Boyte at [email protected].
Bonnie Bolden is the Deep South Connect reporter for Mississippi with Gannett/USA Today. Email her at [email protected].
