Judge Blocks Trump Administration's Efforts to Restructure the Department of Education

A federal court has intervened to halt the Trump administration's sweeping changes to the Department of Education (ED), marking a significant legal challenge to the executive branch's authority over federal agencies. This article delves into the details of the court's decision, the arguments presented by both sides, and the potential implications for the future of the Department of Education.

Court Ruling Halts Workforce Reduction and Transfer of Responsibilities

District Judge Myong Joun issued a preliminary injunction that bars the Trump administration from firing half the Department of Education's workforce. The order from Judge Joun also prohibits the Department of Education from transferring the management of federal student loans to the Small Business Administration. This decision marks the first time a federal judge has determined the Trump administration's sweeping changes to the Department of Education are unlawful. For now, the order puts a stop to the Trump administration's effort to fire more than 2,000 Department of Education employees, transfer federal student loan obligations, and otherwise implement the president's March 20 executive order to "take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education."

Arguments Against the Administration's Actions

A group that includes several state attorneys general, schools, and nonprofits challenged Trump's efforts to reduce the size of the Department of Education last month, arguing the president cannot unilaterally shut down a federal department created by Congress. Calls for the injunction came from lawsuits filed by the Somerville and Easthampton schools districts in Massachusetts along with the American Federation of Teachers, other education groups, and 21 Democratic attorneys general. They argued that the gutting of the department rendered the agency incapable of performing many of its core functions required by Congress. For example, all of the attorneys from the agency’s general counsel office who handle grants for K-12 schools and grants under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, had been fired. The dismantling of the Office for Civil Rights made it difficult to enforce civil rights protections. The department’s Financial Student Aid programs, which provide financial assistance to almost 12.9 million students across approximately 6,100 postsecondary educational institutions, were also hampered. The case made by former department employees, educational institutions, unions, and educators, Joun wrote, paints “stark picture of the irreparable harm that will result from financial uncertainty and delay, impeded access to vital knowledge on which students and educators rely, and loss of essential services for America’s most vulnerable student populations.”

The Administration's Defense

Lawyers for the Trump administration argued that the efforts to reduce the Department of Education would make it more efficient and were separate from Trump's vow to abolish the department. The Trump administration argued that they implemented agency layoffs to improve “efficiency” and “accountability". Trump said he would move the agency’s student loan portfolio to the Small Business Administration, and the Department of Health and Human Services would replace the Education Department’s role in “handling special needs.”

Judge Joun's Scathing Assessment

Judge Joun was unconvinced. His decision offered a blistering assessment of the Trump administration's claim that recent changes to the Department of Education are to improve efficiency, rather than carry out Trump's vow to abolish the Department outright. "The idea that Defendants' actions are merely a 'reorganization' is plainly not true," he wrote. The changes imposed by Trump and Education Secretary Linda McMahon, Judge Joun wrote, "effectively impossible for the Department to carry out its statutorily mandated functions." Though Trump has the authority to remove executive officers, the president does not have the power to dismantle entire federal departments outright, he wrote. He also cast doubt on the claim that the legislative effort to abolish the Department of Education was separate from his executive actions. "Not only is there no evidence that Defendants are pursuing a 'legislative goal' or otherwise working with Congress to reach a resolution, but there is also no evidence that the RIF has actually made the Department more efficient. Rather, the record is replete with evidence of the opposite," the judge wrote, referring to the "reduction in force" firings. "Consolidated Plaintiffs have demonstrated that the Department will not be able to carry out its statutory functions -- and in some cases, is already unable to do so -- and Defendants have proffered no evidence to the contrary," he wrote. Joun added: “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.”

Read also: Visa Reinstatement Order

Impact on Department of Education Employees

The injunction is good news for some former Department of Education employees. Kishia Kegler, one of hundreds of fired civil servants whose official separation starts in June, is committed to returning as appeals play out. Department of Education and reinstate over 1,300 employees who were laid off in March. Judge Joun’s order also requires the department to reinstate employees terminated since Trump’s inauguration to “restore the Department to the status quo such that it is able to carry out its statutory functions.”

Reactions to the Ruling

"Today's order means that the Trump administration's disastrous mass firings of career civil servants are blocked while this wildly disruptive and unlawful agency action is litigated," said Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, which represented several of the plaintiffs. "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." "Today, the court rightly rejected one of the administration's very first illegal, and consequential, acts: abolishing the federal role in education," American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten said of the ruling. "The vast majority of Americans and states like Massachusetts, with the highest NAEP scores, want to keep the education department because it ensures all kids, not just some, can get a shot at a better life." American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten heralded the judge’s ruling, calling it “a first step to reverse this war on knowledge and the undermining of broad-based opportunity.”

Biedermann, from the Education Department, said the ruling was unfair to the Trump administration. “Once again, a far-left Judge has dramatically overstepped his authority, based on a complaint from biased plaintiffs, and issued an injunction against the obviously lawful efforts to make the Department of Education more efficient and functional for the American people,” she said in a statement. Madi Biedermann, Department of Education deputy assistant secretary for communications, said the agency’s reduction-in-force was lawful and called Joun a far-left judge who “overstepped” his authority. “President Trump and the Senate-confirmed Secretary of Education clearly have the authority to make decisions about agency reorganization efforts, not an unelected Judge with a political axe to grind,” Biedermann wrote in a statement to ABC News. “This ruling is not in the best interest of American students or families. We will immediately challenge this on an emergency basis.” Within hours of the Joun’s ruling, the Trump administration filed an appeal. “This ruling is not in the best interest of American students or families,” Madi Biedermann, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Communications, wrote in a statement.

The Broader Context

The injunction comes as Education Secretary Linda McMahon resumed calls to downsize the department during the agency’s fiscal year 2026 budget hearing on Capitol Hill. McMahon defended President Trump’s $12 billion dollar cut to the department in his skinny budget proposal and McMahon stressed her “final mission” to uncreate the agency must be done in a “lawful fashion.” Trump’s executive order instructed McMahon to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education and return authority over education to the States and local communities” to the “maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law.” At the same time, the order said McMahon should ensure “the effective and uninterrupted delivery of services, programs, and benefits on which Americans rely.” Before the layoffs, the Education Department was the smallest of the 15 cabinet-level departments in terms of staffing, according to the judge, with around 4,100 employees. And the plaintiffs said the agency was strained meeting its obligations even then. The ruling was not based on the employees’ job rights, but rather how the agency was able to fulfill its obligations. “It’s not about whether employees have a right to a job,” said Derek Black, a University of South Carolina law professor. “It’s about whether the department can fulfill its statutory obligations to the states and to students.” The Trump Administration, which had pledged to close the department as a campaign goal, maintained that the changes were intended to enhance efficiency. However, the court found no evidence supporting this claim and instead highlighted the potential harm to students and educators, particularly through the loss of vital services and financial instability.

Previous Legal Challenges

District Judge Paul Friedman on Wednesday ordered the department to restore grant funding that had been awarded to the Southern Education Foundation, a nonprofit that receives federal funds to help schools further desegregation efforts dating back to the 1960s. The case centers on two Education Department memos ordering schools and universities to end all "race-based decision-making" or face penalties up to a total loss of federal funding. The conflict started with a Feb. The memo dramatically expanded the government's interpretation of a 2023 Supreme Court decision barring colleges from considering race in admissions decisions. In total, the guidance amounted to a full-scale reframing of the government's approach to civil rights in education. In its lawsuit, the American Federation of Teachers said the government was imposing "unclear and highly subjective" limits on schools across the country.

The Department's Capacity and Civil Rights Enforcement

For instance, Judge Joun pointed out that a record number of complaints filed with ED's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) from 2021 to 2024 created a yearly backlog. He emphasized that the Administration’s closure of seven field offices and halving the staff at OCR, while facing a backlog of complaints, made it impossible for the office to complete investigations and resolve cases promptly and fairly.

Numbers Tell the Story

Department of Education had 4,133 employees, according to the administration's own numbers. The reduction-in-force, announced on March 11, terminated the roles of more than 1,300 employees. At the same time, nearly 600 more had chosen to leave by resigning or retiring. That left roughly 2,180 remaining staff - roughly half the department's size in January.

Management of Federal Student Loan Portfolio

Among the duties the plaintiffs argued the department could no longer faithfully execute was the management of the federal student loan portfolio, including making sure colleges and universities comply with federal funding requirements and that student loan servicers meet their contractual obligations to serve borrowers. The department’s Financial Student Aid programs, which provide financial assistance to almost 12.9 million students across approximately 6,100 postsecondary educational institutions, were also hampered.

Read also: Visas Restored for Oregon Students

tags: #judge #blocks #trump #department #of #education