Highlights
- A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration’s efforts to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education and ordered the reinstatement of over 1,300 fired employees.
- The ruling finds the administration acted unlawfully by attempting to reduce the department’s workforce and functions without congressional approval.
- Plaintiffs included Democratic attorneys general, school districts, and teachers’ unions who argued the cuts would harm education services and civil rights enforcement.
- The Department of Education and Trump administration maintain the actions aimed to improve efficiency, and they have appealed the decision.
- The ruling highlights a legal and political clash over the scope of presidential authority and the future role of the federal government in education.
Judge Blocks Trump’s Move to Dismantle Education Department, Orders 1,300 Workers Reinstated
BOSTON, MA — A federal judge has issued a sweeping injunction against the Trump administration’s attempt to effectively dismantle the U.S. Department of Education, ordering the reinstatement of more than 1,300 terminated employees and blocking the transfer of its core functions to other agencies.
Judge Myong Joun of the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts, in an 88-page ruling, found that the administration’s March executive order—aimed at shutting down the department—overstepped constitutional boundaries and ignored the legislative authority required to dissolve a federal agency.
The case stemmed from two consolidated lawsuits brought by Democratic-led states, public school districts, and education unions, including the American Federation of Teachers.
“The record abundantly reveals that defendants’ true intention is to effectively dismantle the department without an authorizing statute,” wrote Joun, an appointee of President Joe Biden.
Impact of Mass Layoffs and Legal Challenges
The Department of Education had reduced its workforce from over 4,100 to fewer than 2,200 through a mix of layoffs, buyouts, and terminations of probationary employees. These reductions came days before President Donald Trump signed an executive order directing Secretary of Education Linda McMahon to initiate the department’s closure.
Plaintiffs argued that the reduction crippled the agency’s ability to fulfill its responsibilities—ranging from civil rights enforcement and student loan processing to data collection and support for special education programs.
Judge Joun agreed, concluding that the cuts posed “irreparable harm” to the states and their student populations by delaying funding and disrupting long-term planning for education services.
Compare: Taking an Online GED Course vs Going Back to School
Administration Defends Intentions, Files Appeal
In response, Education Department spokesperson Madi Biedermann called the ruling an overreach by “a far-left judge,” defending the layoffs as part of a lawful strategy to reduce government inefficiency.
“President Trump and Secretary McMahon clearly have the authority to make decisions about agency reorganization,” Biedermann said, adding that the administration would appeal the ruling immediately.
The White House echoed these sentiments, with spokesperson Harrison Fields describing the court’s decision as “misguided,” insisting the changes were meant to empower states and streamline federal operations.
A Clash Over Federal Role in Education
Trump’s effort to close the Department of Education reflects a longstanding Republican push to shift control of education policy from the federal government to states. In his executive order, Trump claimed the agency had failed students and that decentralization would improve outcomes.
However, Judge Joun found no evidence the administration had conducted a meaningful assessment of how the cuts would increase efficiency. He further noted that any move to shutter a federal department must involve congressional action—a step the administration had not taken.
Education advocates hailed the decision. “This is a first step to reverse this war on knowledge,” said Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers. Similarly, California Attorney General Rob Bonta called the attempted dismantling “unlawful and absurd,” vowing continued legal resistance.
Despite the injunction, many worry that lasting damage has already occurred. Some former employees have accepted retirements or moved on, and rebuilding institutional knowledge may take years.
“You can’t deny the fact that we’ve lost a ton of experience that is going to take a really long time to rebuild,” said former department employee Rachel Gittleman.
The court’s order remains in effect while litigation continues, setting the stage for further legal and political battles over the federal government’s role in American education.
Also in the News: