The Fate of the Department of Education: What Trump’s Proposed Cuts Mean for Students and Schools

As former President Donald Trump pursued his agenda to reduce the size and scope of federal agencies, one of his primary targets was the U.S. Department of Education. He repeatedly expressed his desire to eliminate the department altogether, raising concerns and questions among students, parents, educators, and administrators across the country.

Linda McMahon, who served as Education Secretary under Trump, acknowledged his clear intention to significantly alter the department’s role. While the prospect of such drastic changes looms, it’s crucial to understand the department’s existing functions, the potential impact of proposed cuts, and the legal limitations on the president’s ability to unilaterally dismantle the agency.

Understanding the Department of Education’s Role

It’s a common misconception that the Department of Education dictates what students learn. In reality, the department has no direct control over school curricula. The concept of sending education "back to the states," as Trump advocated, is somewhat misleading because education is already largely a state and local responsibility.

However, the federal government does play a vital role in ensuring equal access and opportunity within the education system. The Department of Education is legally mandated to:

• Prevent discrimination: Any educational program receiving federal funding, including K-12 schools and colleges, both public and private, cannot discriminate against students based on race, ethnicity, gender, religion, or other protected characteristics.
• Protect students with disabilities: The department ensures that students and teachers with disabilities are treated fairly and have access to the resources and accommodations they need to succeed.
• Support low-income schools: The department provides resources to low-income schools to help them bridge the gap with wealthier schools and provide a quality education to all students, regardless of their socioeconomic background.
• Hold colleges accountable: The agency issues regulations for colleges to ensure they are preparing graduates for meaningful employment and contributing to the workforce.
• Administer financial aid: The department functions as a major financial institution, distributing billions of dollars in student loans and grants to help students afford college.

The Limits of Presidential Power

While Trump voiced his desire to close the Department of Education, he cannot do so unilaterally. The U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power to pass laws, and the president is responsible for ensuring those laws are faithfully executed. Since Congress created the Department of Education, only Congress can abolish it.

McMahon acknowledged this during her confirmation hearing, stating that she understood the need to work with Congress to downsize the agency and improve its efficiency. Many of the offices within the department were also established by law, requiring legislative action to close them or transfer their functions to other agencies.

Potential Scenarios and Their Implications

Although abolishing the Department of Education entirely would require bipartisan support in Congress, which is unlikely, several other scenarios are possible:

• Reorganization: Congress could pass legislation to reorganize the agency’s functions, relocating them to other parts of the government. However, even this would likely require Democratic support, making it a challenging endeavor.
• Budget Cuts: The administration could significantly reduce the department’s budget, potentially impacting its ability to enforce regulations, administer financial aid programs, and provide resources to schools and students.

Even if the Education Department were reorganized, existing laws would still require the government to continue overseeing student loans, issuing grants, and ensuring non-discrimination in schools receiving federal funding. To comply with Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, Congress would have to designate another agency to administer programs like Pell Grants, which are crucial for lower-income students.

Concerns About the Future of Federal Student Aid

McMahon assured that congressionally appropriated funds, including financial aid, would not be affected by the administration’s plans to downsize the Education Department. However, the Federal Student Aid office, which Trump proposed relocating to the Small Business Administration, has already experienced staff reductions through layoffs and buyouts. These departures raise concerns about potential disruptions and negative consequences for students.

The Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), which is required to obtain federal financial aid, could be impacted by staff turnover or a transfer of the Federal Student Aid office. Even a well-intentioned overhaul could create downstream problems for students, potentially delaying or complicating the financial aid process.

Federal student loans, like other forms of federal financial aid, are expected to continue being disbursed as long as Congress maintains the programs. However, significant changes and uncertainty within the Department of Education could lead to delays and complications.

Impact on Curriculum and College Funding

The Department of Education does not control school curricula, so courses at K-12 schools and colleges are unlikely to be directly affected by the proposed changes. However, the Trump administration took steps to reduce financial support for colleges, including altering research funding. A policy shift at the National Institutes of Health that would have stripped institutions of billions of dollars was temporarily halted by a federal judge.

Federal agencies have also abruptly canceled or threatened contracts and grants for colleges, forcing some institutions to implement hiring freezes or suspend graduate admissions.

Protections for Students with Disabilities

Educational services for students with disabilities are mandated by law and should remain protected. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires public schools to provide a "free appropriate public education" to all students with disabilities.

However, there are concerns that it may become more difficult to file complaints related to disability rights. The Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights briefly paused investigations into disability-related complaints, leaving families and advocates uncertain about the future.

McMahon suggested the possibility of moving disability rights enforcement to the Health and Human Services Department, raising concerns among advocates who fear that such a transition could cause delays and disruptions, ultimately harming students with disabilities.

Conclusion

The proposed changes to the Department of Education under the Trump administration sparked significant debate and uncertainty. While the president’s power to unilaterally eliminate the department is limited, the potential for reorganization, budget cuts, and staff reductions raises concerns about the future of federal student aid, protections for vulnerable students, and the overall accessibility and quality of education in the United States. The long-term impact of these changes will depend on the actions of Congress and the ongoing efforts of educators, advocates, and policymakers to ensure that all students have the opportunity to succeed.