Federal Actions to Eliminate the U.S. Department of Education: What to Know

Dismantling the Education Department

This resource, originally published Nov. 25, was updated on March 23 to reflect the U.S. Department of Education’s recent decision to move its student loan portfolio to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. 

President Donald Trump’s pledge to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education took yet another big leap forward on March 19, with the announcement that significant management of federal student loans will move from the Education Department to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. More than two-thirds of the Education Department’s budget goes to grants or loans for postsecondary education. The Education Department says the move will “enhance the administration of federal student aid programs” and enable borrowers in default to start repaying their loans. Opponents have raised concerns about the change, including its legality and potential to confuse borrowers.

This decision comes a few months after the administration announced it would move key Education Department programs – from K-12 through postsecondary – to other federal agencies. All of these moves are part of the Trump administration’s plan to “return education to the states,” a phrase The Washington Post’s Laura Meckler (among others) argues is a misnomer.

Take a look at Education Week’s handy guide to discover where other programs are being moved (K-12 and college programs to the Department of Labor, for example). The Hechinger Report is also tracking President Trump’s orders on education issues more broadly. The Guardian has reported on the difficulty of working at the Education Department and the low morale there in the wake of this and other efforts to dismantle the department this year.

There’s been no announcement yet on where special education programs would land, if they’re moved at all. See the Education Writers Association’s Q&A with the executive director of the nonprofit advocacy organization Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates (COPAA) for more on the special education ramifications.

Here’s some background – compiled in November, after the Trump administration announced other Education Department moves – on how we got here and what’s next. This resource also includes tips for reporters looking to keep tabs on the administration’s goals to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education, which is the focus of a new EWA Issues page to help journalists cover federal changes:

How Long Has This Plan Been in the Works?

Conservatives have long sought to close the Department of Education, created at the behest of  Democratic President Jimmy Carter in 1979. President Trump previously pledged to shut down the department during his first term and renewed that pledge in his second campaign. A year ago, The Washington Post’s education team looked at how Trump’s pledge might unfold, and noted the “symbolic impact” – especially for conservative audiences – of eliminating a department long criticized for waste and bloat. 

What’s at Stake for Students and Other Stakeholders? 

Critics say without federal oversight, some of the most vulnerable students will be left without adequate resources and support. This is in part because states are unprepared to assume the reins – particularly on complex matters related to special education. Supporters, including Education Secretary Linda McMahon, contend that more money will eventually reach classrooms without her agency standing in the way. 

Is Dismantling the Education Department Really Happening This Time?

In addition to being a presidential campaign pledge, closing the Department of Education was a central plank of The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025. As NPR noted, the organization’s Lindsey Burke, who authored the education chapter, is McMahon’s deputy chief of staff for policy and programs. With Trump working from the hyper-conservative foundation’s blueprint, the gutting of the department has progressed at a rapid pace – even amid multiple court challenges. All that being said, it’s been pointed out repeatedly  – including by our journalist friends across the pond – that it would take an act of Congress to fully shutter the federal agency.

In terms of the consequences of moving programs to other departments, some education experts don’t think it will signal the end of the department. Certainly, the piecemeal dismantling could potentially be reversed the next time Democrats are in power – although that could be a complicated and incomplete process.

Many voices at opposite ends of the political spectrum have dismissed the recent reshuffling as a “nothing burger” (Mike Petrilli at the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute) and “fairy dust” (Kevin Carey of the progressive New America Foundation, which has called the dismantling “wasteful, wrong and illegal.”). The Libertarian Cato Institute praised the recent developments to relocate programs to other agencies, but said that should just be the first step in eventually winding down all of the department’s existing operations. 

Experts expect legal challenges to actions to move education department programs to other offices. Unions and other groups have already sued to reverse some of the mass layoffs of department staff, with some success. 

For more on the legal aspects of these developments, the consulting group EdCounsel is tracking Trump’s related executive actions. The Education Law Center is among the groups challenging the changes to the Department of Education, as is the Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates. The Sligo Law Group specializes in federal education policy. 

What Questions Should Reporters Be Asking Right Now? 

• In a private conversation with federal employees, McMahon suggested relocating the programs to other agencies was “temporary” and reversible, if necessary, and defended her decision to her unsettled employees. What would be the threshold for deciding if this experiment is a success or failure?
• How many existing federal education department employees are following the programs to new locations inside other agencies? Where are the real cost savings to taxpayers or the improved efficiencies being promised? The education department moved Career and Technical Education management to the U.S. Department of Labor this year. What were the concerns with that, and how has that work progressed?
• Are state education departments ready to take on the oversight and administrative responsibilities the federal government intends to hand to them? What key positions are vacant, and what new ones might need to be created? How will those jobs be filled – and paid for? (Education Week spoke with some state superintendents about what they’re thinking.)