President Trump on Thursday signed an executive order to dismantle the Department of Education, a long-anticipated action that will affect how billions of dollars in federal funding for California will be distributed to millions of students, educators and institutions.
“We’re going to shut it down and shut it down as quickly as possible,” Trump said at a White House event to celebrate his executive order. “It’s doing us no good. We want to return our students to the states.”
Trump pledged that vital mandated programs — Pell grants for low-income college students, and Title I funding that serves students from disadvantaged families and programs for students with disabilities — would continue without interruption under the management of other agencies.
The dismantling of the department has been unofficially in progress for weeks but would require the approval of Congress to fully shut down.
Yet Trump’s impact on education already has been substantial in California. The administration yanked federal funding from entities that don’t go along with his agenda, especially Trump’s opposition to diversity, equity and inclusion programs, or DEI, and his efforts to remove transgender students as a protected group under anti-discrimination laws.
The administration has canceled $148 million in teacher-training grants for California that were meant to address an acute teacher shortage, and promote a diverse teaching workforce. That cancellation is now before the courts.
In addition, the slashing this month of Education Department staff by half has affected the agency’s ability to carry out routine but important tasks, including those mandated by Congress, such as grant and loan programs for students.
The recent cuts were especially deep to research efforts and investigations by the Office for Civil Rights. The civil rights office has nonetheless launched major investigation and enforcement actions against colleges and K-12 districts accused of not acting to stop antisemitism or of allowing transgender students to participate in girls sports.
Here are key points to understand about the future of the department under Trump:
Trump said the closure returns education to the states. But it’s already there.
Trump’s order as well as repeated public statements focus on what the president has referred to as his “dream” of “returning education to the states.”
States already were in control of most aspects of education — and control has moved more toward states in recent years.
“States can and will still drive education, and local communities will have lots to say about what they do,” said Pedro Noguera, dean of the USC Rossier School of Education. “What’s going to be missing is federal leadership.”
There have been periods when the federal government took more control: When the National Guard, for example, forced schools in the South to allow Black students to attend the same campuses as white students.
Another period began in 2001 with No Child Left Behind — a bipartisan effort that joined President George W. Bush with Sen. Ted Kennedy. Schools were given a 2014 deadline to pull up every student to academic proficiency or face penalties. That effort failed.
President Obama continued somewhat in that vein by dangling huge grants — as schools were trying to recover from recession funding cuts — to adopt favored policies, including using test scores to evaluate teachers. That effort faded away toward the end of the Obama administration.
Nothing in current law prevents states from establishing curriculum, learning standards and accountability measures.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who was on hand for the signing of the executive order, both celebrated Trump’s action and acknowledged an inherent contradiction in a comment circulated by the White House.
“Abolishing the department would usher in a new era of American educational excellence,” DeSantis said. “States already implement their curriculum and operate their education programs.” DeSantis’ view is that the cutting of “red tape” would allow states to accomplish more and more quickly.
But what DeSantis sees as strangling regulation, California Assemblyman Al Muratsuchi (D-Rolling Hills Estates) sees as necessary oversight.
“This is not just an issue about federal funds,” said Muratsuchi, a former school board member who chairs the Assembly’s education committee. “This is an issue about the federal government’s responsibility to investigate and to enforce our federal laws that we’ve fought for decades for — to ensure equal educational opportunity” especially for students with disabilities.
Trump supporter and Chino Valley Unified School Board President Sonja Shaw said it might not be enough to simply defer to states. Before Trump’s election, her district advanced policies that align with those of Trump — and state officials stopped some of them through litigation and legislation.
“Right now, California holds school districts hostage with funding, forcing them to comply with radical policies that undermine parental rights and destroy public education,” Shaw said. “If Trump’s plan includes bypassing corrupt state governments and empowering local communities, it would be a game-changer.”
President Trump does not have the authority to close the Department of Education, but so far that hasn’t mattered.
This issue could be headed for the courts, although Education Secretary Linda McMahon has conceded that Congress would have to be involved at some point for the shutdown to take full effect.
In the meantime, however, she is leading an effort to end as much as she can — and critics say she is doing more than is legally allowed. This is where lawsuits and courts already have entered the picture.
Congress could intervene by giving Trump the authority he wants or by taking strong action to make it clear he lacks authority.
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) said Thursday that he “will support the president’s goals by submitting legislation to accomplish this as soon as possible.”
Democratic lawmakers vowed to fight back.
If the Education Department closes, programs that many consider vital will lose their funding.
Cuts already have decimated the department’s ability to fund, evaluate and disseminate research.
“One of the first casualties of decentralization would be the collection of education data, as many policymakers may resist transparency in assessing the effectiveness of their policies,” said Gabriel Buelna, an elected trustee of the Los Angeles Community College District. “Without reliable data, it becomes easier to ignore systemic failures, leading to policies that favor elite interests over public education investment.”
While Trump pledged Thursday to honor commitments mandated by Congress, the logistics of doing so are likely to become a problem because of decreased staffing and a dispersal of the department, said Linda Darling-Hammond, president of California’s Board of Education.
“We’ve already cut a lot of staff from the department. Can it engage in its functions? Personnel cuts may affect the ability to get money out the door, both for programs and for students who are getting federal loans,” Darling-Hammond said.
“If programs are dispersed, they’re going to be administered less coherently, and the effect on districts and states will be that they have to report to multiple departments for multiple different programs,” she added.
The prospect of punitive cuts looms large if California and its education institutions refuse to adhere to Trump policy positions on limiting LGBTQ+ rights and DEI programs.
Orange County parent and former school board member Madison Miner, however, sees nothing but upside to Trump’s executive order.
“For too long, this bureaucracy has failed our children, pushing political agendas instead of focusing on real education,” said Miner, who chairs the Orange County chapter of Moms for Liberty. “Parents, teachers and local communities — not Washington bureaucrats — know what’s best for our kids.”
California education institutions are on a collision course with the Trump administration.
California leaders and education institutions have largely established themselves in opposition to Trump or have long pursued policies contrary to his agenda.
California Democratic leaders are especially at odds with the Trump administration over the state’s assistance to immigrants who are not authorized to live in the U.S. and for measures that designate LGBTQ+ individuals as a group with full protection from discrimination.
Democratic officials — in a state dominated by Democrats — vow to carry on with their opposition.
“We will continue to fight any federal actions that threaten to harm our most vulnerable student populations,” said L.A. school board member Nick Melvoin.
