A federal judge in Boston called out the Trump administration for attempting to abolish the U.S. Department of Education while claiming it was merely seeking to restructure the agency.
“The record abundantly reveals that defendants’ true intention is to effectively dismantle the department without an authorizing statute,” U.S. District Judge Myong Joun said in a May 22 preliminary injunction granted plaintiffs in two lawsuits filed against the federal government.
The litigation effectively demonstrated the harm already caused by the shutdown of seven of 12 DOE offices, such as the division charged with enforcing sex, race and disability protections for public school students, Joun said.
Hence, the administration’s actions “will likely cripple the department. The idea that defendants’ actions are merely a ‘reorganization’ is plainly not true.”
Amanda Tyler
While Joun’s ruling included a detailed analysis of the administration’s actions, he also had “a pretty simple record” of public statements and activities to go on in determining the combined legal challenges would likely be successful, said Amanda Tyler, executive director of Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty.
“The judge here said ‘the record abundantly reveals that defendants’ true intention is to effectively dismantle the department without an authorizing statute,’” Tyler explained May 27 during a live episode of BJC’s “Respecting Religion” podcast. “These are some pretty strong words from this federal judge.”
The record includes an executive order Trump signed in March claiming the department is a drain on federal tax dollars and implying its 1979 creation was pushed by President Jimmy Carter after being endorsed by a national teachers’ union.
The order repeatedly refers to “closing” or to “the closure” of the department.
“The Secretary of Education shall, to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law, take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education and return authority over education to the states and local communities while ensuring the effective and uninterrupted delivery of services, programs and benefits on which Americans rely,” Trump’s order says.
Project 2025, the Trump-backed Christian nationalist blueprint for dismantling the U.S. government, details the demise of federally mandated, secular education so billions in taxpayer dollars can be diverted to private religious education.
In addition, the administration has erred in not giving Congress a say in the fate of any government entity it created, Tyler said. “We have noted numerous times that President Trump cannot do that without congressional authority and congressional action. So, this was overextending his authority doing these actions and having these mass layoffs at the Department of Education.”
Skye Perryman
The ruling blocks the administration’s actions as litigation against it moves forward, said Skye Perryman, president of Democracy Forward, a nonprofit legal group representing unions, school districts and educators in one of the two combined actions before the court.
“No one’s lives are being made better by this administration’s attempted dismantling of the Department of Education. Instead of taking a wrecking ball to our nation’s best values and our chance at a better future, this administration should be focused on how to improve education and opportunities for all,” she said.
The lawsuit targeted a mass termination order issued by Secretary of Education Linda McMahon to gut the department and decimate key services provided to public schools and their communities. Had the administration been allowed to proceed, the agency’s workforce would have been slashed from about 4,100 in January to nearly 2,200, Democracy Forward noted.
Trump’s order also calls for moving remaining Education Department programs to other federal agencies. In his ruling, Joun said the consequences of the plan would be unacceptable with litigation pending.
“A department without enough employees to perform statutorily mandated functions is not a department at all. This court cannot be asked to cover its eyes while the department’s employees are continuously fired and units are transferred out until the department becomes a shell of itself.”
Randi Weingarten
The preliminary injunction is an important salvo in the fight against Trump’s campaign to abolish the federal role in education, said Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers. “This decision is a first step to reverse this war on knowledge and the undermining of broad-based opportunity.”
The ruling also is important because the Department of Education ensures public school students are educated without regard to religious belief, said Holly Hollman, general counsel and associate executive director of BJC. “Public schools not only serve 90% of the population, but they do so in a way that respects faith freedom for all.”
Holly Hollman
During their live podcast, Tyler and Hollman also discussed the national school voucher program contained in a massive spending bill recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives.
If this were to become law, the plan would divert $50 billion in federal funds annually into private school vouchers, including religious schools where the funds would be used for religious training and education. The measure also would create a tax shelter benefitting wealthy Americans who contribute to the voucher system.
The bill would add as much as $4 trillion to the federal debt for private school vouchers that have been rejected by voters in all 17 states that have put them on the ballot, Tyler said.
“It is particularly galling that this is a benefit for people with means who already have kids in private schools,” Hollman added.
But a 4-4 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court denying charter school status to a religious school in Oklahoma was welcome news, she said.
The judgment against St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School affects Oklahoma only because of the court’s split vote. Justice Amie Coney Barrett abstained from the decision.
“BJC joined with other Christian, Muslim, Jewish and interfaith groups to make our voice known in that case, and we particularly focused on the importance of the federal Establishment Clause,” Hollman said.
The outcome was a win for the Constitution, she added, because “the court did not use this case to totally transform expectations about government funding of religious institutions, and particularly religious formation and education.”
Related articles:
‘Big beautiful bill’ creates school voucher program that benefits the rich
Split Supreme Court won’t allow public funds for religious charter school