On March 10, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order aimed at dismantling the U.S. Department of Education, a decision that has reignited longstanding debates over the role of federal government in education. This move is being hailed by some conservatives as a step towards decentralizing education, but it raises significant questions about the long-term consequences for students, teachers, and the integrity of the U.S. educational system. While Trump frames this as an effort to “return power to the people” by shifting control from the federal government to states, the order is already facing considerable legal, political, and practical challenges.
A Bold but Misguided Vision of Decentralization
Trump’s move is not new territory for conservative politics. For decades, the idea of reducing or eliminating the Department of Education has been a key goal for those who believe the federal government overreaches into local education systems. Trump’s executive order represents a final push to realize this vision. But the implications of such a shift are far from straightforward.
In his announcement, Trump cited what he called the “breathtaking failures” of the Department of Education, accusing it of mismanaging taxpayer funds and promoting a divisive political agenda in schools. While criticisms of the department’s focus on equity and inclusivity are common among certain political factions, the underlying question is whether dismantling the department will truly solve the problems it aims to address, or exacerbate them.
The department, established in 1979, serves as a critical mechanism for ensuring access to education across the U.S. It administers student loans, facilitates financial aid, and enforces educational standards, especially for disadvantaged students. In Trump’s view, however, these functions are better handled at the local level, under state and local governments’ control. The issue with this rhetoric is that it overlooks the fact that the very inequalities in education—such as disparities in funding, quality of teaching, and access to resources—are more likely to be exacerbated when the federal safety net is removed.
The Federal Funding Debate: A Red Herring?
Trump’s executive order threatens to cut a vital lifeline for many schools, particularly in underserved areas. The federal government currently contributes only about 13% of K-12 school funding, with the majority coming from state and local taxes. While this proportion may seem small, the federal funds play a crucial role in addressing systemic inequities, especially for low-income communities. These communities often struggle to raise sufficient revenue through local taxes, and without federal support, schools in these areas would likely face even steeper cuts.
Moreover, Trump’s executive order is vague on what the next steps will be. There is no clear plan on how resources, such as federal funding for special education or Pell Grants for low-income college students, will be redistributed or replaced. Trump’s rhetoric about returning control to states glosses over the financial burden that many state and local governments are already under. It is unclear how these governments, many of which already face budget shortfalls, will be able to shoulder the additional responsibility of managing education funding and ensuring equitable access to education.
Legal and Political Roadblocks: A Question of Feasibility
While Trump’s order may sound definitive, it faces significant legal and political obstacles. Dismantling a federal agency like the Department of Education is no small feat. Even with a Republican-majority Senate, the complexity of passing such sweeping legislation means the move could be dead in the water without substantial support from Congress. In addition, opposition from teachers’ unions, education advocacy groups, and civil rights organizations is expected to mount as the order moves through the legislative process.
These groups argue that eliminating the Department of Education would disproportionately hurt marginalized communities. The American Federation of Teachers (AFT), one of the most powerful education unions in the country, has strongly opposed the order, warning that it would lead to greater inequality in education, particularly for students of color, low-income students, and those with disabilities. This issue will likely spark lengthy court battles and public outcry, slowing down any immediate efforts to dissolve the department.
The Fallout: What Happens to Educational Programs?
The specifics of what will happen to programs like student loans, Pell Grants, and Title I funding (which helps schools serving low-income students) remain unclear. If Trump’s executive order proceeds, it could lead to severe cuts to federal educational programs, leaving students and schools scrambling to find alternative sources of support. For example, millions of Americans rely on federal student loans to fund their higher education. A shift in responsibility to state governments may not only create a patchwork system of funding but could also result in unequal access to resources.
The Department of Education employs over 4,000 people, and the potential loss of jobs or a reallocation of responsibilities could destabilize the administration of educational policy and programs. The political fallout from mass layoffs and the loss of institutional knowledge could set back U.S. education by years.
The Long-Term Conservative Agenda: A Step Backward for Education Reform?
The move to eliminate the Department of Education is part of a broader conservative agenda to reduce the influence of federal government in local affairs. Reagan attempted similar reforms in the 1980s, and the idea of “education freedom” has been a rallying cry for conservatives ever since. However, the reality is that without strong federal oversight, there is little guarantee that local governments will prioritize educational equity or adequately address the needs of disadvantaged students.
Trump’s insistence on local control may sound appealing to those who favor less government intervention, but it could undermine decades of progress in addressing racial and economic disparities in education. By pulling back federal involvement, the administration risks ignoring the unique challenges that many school districts face—especially in high-poverty areas—where local governments may lack the resources or political will to close achievement gaps.
What’s Next? The Uncertain Future of U.S. Education
As the legal and political challenges unfold, the future of the Department of Education remains uncertain. Trump’s executive order marks a significant moment in his presidency, but it also signals a broader ideological battle over the role of government in education. While the idea of decentralizing education has appeal for some, it raises critical questions about how to address the longstanding inequities that persist in the U.S. education system.
If the Department of Education is successfully dismantled, it could lead to an era of education policy defined by fragmentation, uneven access to resources, and a lack of centralized accountability. At the same time, the increasing politicization of education raises concerns that critical issues like climate change, gender equity, and civil rights will be sidelined in favor of narrow ideological agendas.
The coming months will reveal whether Trump’s executive order will succeed, and whether his vision for a more localized, market-driven education system will truly benefit the nation’s students. Until then, one thing remains clear: the battle over the future of U.S. education is far from over.
Related stories:
The JFK Files Declassified: What Trump’s Executive Order Revealed
The U.S. and the Illusion of Peace: A History of Failed Deals and Broken Promises
Trump Administration Bans Hundreds of Diversity and Inclusion Terms from Federal Records
