Already a subscriber? Make sure to log into your account before viewing this content. You can access your account by hitting the “login” button on the top right corner. Still unable to see the content after signing in? Make sure your card on file is up-to-date.
The Trump administration has officially called on the Supreme Court to lift a federal court order that blocked its attempt to dismantle the Department of Education.
Some shit you should know before you read: Shortly after returning to office, President Trump ordered the closure of the Department of Education, arguing that the agency is bloated, ineffective, and better replaced by state-level control. He tasked Education Secretary Linda McMahon with overseeing the process, directing her in a March 20 executive order to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law.” Critics, however, argue that the department plays a vital role in administering federal student aid, supporting special education, and enforcing civil rights laws in schools. They warn that dismantling the agency without congressional approval would not only cripple these essential services but also violate constitutional checks and balances.
What’s going on now: In a notable development, the Trump administration filed an emergency request with the Supreme Court seeking to overturn a lower court ruling that halted its efforts to dismantle the Department of Education. The administration asked the Court to lift a preliminary injunction issued by US District Judge Myong Joun in Boston, which ordered the reinstatement of nearly 1,400 Education Department employees laid off in March. Judge Joun determined that the mass layoffs would “likely cripple the department,” and that President Trump’s actions amounted to an unauthorized attempt to effectively shut down a federal agency without congressional approval.
He wrote, “A department without enough employees to perform statutorily mandated functions is not a department at all,” noting that the plaintiffs—including states and education organizations—were likely to succeed in proving the administration overstepped its authority.
In its appeal, the Trump administration argued that the judiciary has no role in second-guessing executive decisions related to agency structure and personnel. US Solicitor General D. John Sauer, representing the administration, argued that Judge Joun’s order improperly “substitutes [the court’s] policy preferences for those of the Executive Branch.” Sauer emphasized that the executive branch alone has the constitutional authority to determine “how many employees are needed to carry out an agency’s statutory functions, and whom they should be.”
The administration also maintains that its reduction in force “effectuates the Administration’s policy of streamlining the Department and eliminating discretionary functions that, in the Administration’s view, are better left to the States.”
