Trump’s uncertain stance on the future of the Department of Education

Department of Research, Studies and International News 07-03-2025

President Donald Trump has sent conflicting messages regarding his administration’s plans for the Department of Education, sparking debate over the potential implications of its closure. While he has openly supported dismantling the department, mixed signals from his team have left the public uncertain about the administration’s final course of action. Critics argue that shutting down the department would disproportionately affect rural communities, low-income students, and individuals with disabilities, while supporters claim it would restore education oversight to the states.

Trump’s Push to Eliminate the Department of Education

During a signing ceremony at the White House, Trump reaffirmed his commitment to downsizing the federal government, including dissolving the Department of Education. “We’re starting the process,” he stated when asked about his plans for the department’s future. Reports initially suggested that an executive order to begin the shutdown process would be among the documents signed that day. However, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt dismissed these claims as “fake news” just hours before Trump’s remarks.

Despite the confusion, Trump made it clear that he views the department as an unnecessary federal bureaucracy that should be dismantled. He reiterated his belief that individual states should take full responsibility for their education systems, stating, “We’re trying to get the schools back into the states. Let the states run the schools.” However, this statement misrepresented the department’s role, as it does not dictate school curricula but rather oversees federal education funding, research, and anti-discrimination policies.

Reallocating Responsibilities

When questioned about what would happen to the department’s functions, particularly its oversight of federal student loans and grants, Trump suggested that these responsibilities could be reassigned to other government agencies. “That would be brought into either Treasury or Small Business Administration or Commerce,” he proposed, adding that discussions had already taken place about the transition. He argued that handling student loans should not be the Education Department’s responsibility, instead suggesting that the Small Business Administration could take over that function.

This proposal aligns with Trump’s broader vision of shrinking the federal government by consolidating or eliminating various agencies. His administration has already taken steps in this direction, notably by reducing the size of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and cutting its staff to essential personnel.

Opposition from Democrats and Education Advocates

The prospect of eliminating the Department of Education has been met with strong opposition, particularly from Democratic lawmakers. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer condemned the idea, arguing that it would devastate public education, especially for vulnerable communities. “The blast radius of this order will harm nearly every child, every teacher, every family, and every community,” Schumer warned in a press conference. He criticized the administration for prioritizing government cuts over ensuring equitable access to education.

Senator Bernie Sanders echoed these concerns, acknowledging the need for efficiency in the department but rejecting the idea of abolishing it entirely. He argued that shifting educational responsibilities to the states would place an undue financial burden on local governments, particularly in rural areas with fewer resources. “Do we need to make the Department of Education more efficient? Yes. Do we need to destroy it and wreak havoc for working-class families? Absolutely not,” Sanders said.

Conservative Criticism of the Education System

Trump’s push to dismantle the Department of Education aligns with long-standing conservative criticisms of the federal role in education. Many right-wing politicians and activists argue that the system has become overly influenced by progressive social policies, which they claim undermine traditional values.

During his reelection campaign, Trump emphasized his commitment to removing what he called “woke” influences from education. The 2024 Republican Party platform included a pledge to “ensure safe learning environments free from political meddling.” As part of this agenda, conservatives have targeted policies such as Title IX, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in schools, and federal regulations that promote diversity and inclusion.

The Department of Education also plays a crucial financial role, providing approximately 8% of funding for public elementary and secondary schools, as well as overseeing student financial aid. Critics of Trump’s plan argue that redistributing these funds to individual states could lead to disparities in education quality and access.

Beyond the fate of the Department of Education, Trump has also sought to reshape the American education system through policies that promote school choice and limit federal involvement. He and Secretary McMahon are strong advocates for voucher programs that allow families to use public funds for private schooling. Critics argue that these policies divert resources from public schools, further exacerbating educational inequalities.

Trump has also attempted to influence higher education by tying federal funding to ideological compliance. In a recent social media post, he warned that universities failing to crack down on “illegal protests” could face funding cuts. While his comments were widely interpreted as a response to pro-Palestinian demonstrations, they left room for broader interpretations, raising concerns about potential government overreach in academic institutions.