Trump order to close Education Department sparks congressional action, lawsuits

Lawmakers, school advocates and teachers’ unions are taking swift action after President Donald Trump’s executive order to begin dismantling the Department of Education, one of his most controversial moves yet.

Opponents of Trump’s action responded with promises of legal retaliation. But supportive lawmakers may beat them to the chase, with U.S. Sens. Bill Cassidy, R-La., and Mike Rounds, R-S.D., each planning to introduce legislation to completely eliminate the department.

“I agree with President Trump that the Department of Education has failed its mission,” Cassidy said. “Since the Department can only be shut down with Congressional approval, I will support the President’s goals by submitting legislation to accomplish this as soon as possible.”

Rounds said he is already discussing legislation with Secretary of Education Linda McMahon “that would return education decisions to states and local school districts while maintaining important programs like special education and Title I.”

Trump already shrunk the department’s workforce to half its size last week. His executive order Thursday directs 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 while ensuring the effective and uninterrupted delivery of services, programs, and benefits on which Americans rely,” as far as legally possible.

For now, that means the department like enforcing Title IX and civil rights laws, funding special education and disability programs, and overseeing student loans and Pell grants, Trump said. On Friday, Trump said the Small Business Administration would take over the nation’s student loans.

But the ultimate goal is to redistribute these programs among other federal departments and agencies, which would require congressional approval.

School choice organizations are praising Trump’s plan to eventually eliminate the Education Department as a necessary development that will save taxpayers’ money and return power to states, local governments, and parents.

“These are the first steps towards reforming an American education system that should have always been a state and local proposition,” Parents Defending Education Vice President Sarah Parshall Perry said. “We are looking forward to continuing our mission to empower parents and students in educational environments that are once again value-neutral, and devoid of radical ideologies”

Supporters also point to how the department has spent $3 trillion taxpayer dollars since its creation by congressional legislation in 1979. Meanwhile, U.S. students rank 28 out of 37 member countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and standardized test scores have remained flat for decades.

ACE Scholarships, which provides aid to lower-income K-12 students, said in a statement that the Department of Education’s efforts have been “a wasteful distraction” and that the president’s “new approach” to education “puts children first by increasing choice and empowering parents instead of Washington bureaucrats.”

But public school advocacy organizations and teachers unions are already preparing lawsuits against what they say is an unconstitutional move.

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, which represents 1.8 million pre-K through 12th-grade teachers, had a simple message for Trump after the executive order: “See you in court.”

The New York-based United Federation of Teachers stated that “we are working with our partners to file lawsuits to stop this executive overreach.”

Democracy Forward, a legal services nonprofit, is also planning to join the fight.

“We will be filing litigation against this action and will use every legal tool to ensure that the rights of students, teachers, and families are fully protected,” President and CEO Skye Perryman stated. “Since Inauguration Day, the Trump-Vance administration has been taken to court more than 100 times, and we will do it again this time.”

Trump opponents argue that dismantling the department will cause property taxes to spike nationwide, strain public school resources and could cause struggling schools to close, expanding class sizes in the remaining schools.

“Beyond the obvious issue that the Education Department can’t be eliminated without an act of Congress, Trump’s order is yet another wild and illicit power grab,” Co-President of Public Citizen Lisa Gilbert said. “Attempting to destroy the cabinet agencies tasked with promoting and improving education isn’t just irresponsible, it is immoral, and will hurt the very fabric of our nation, as we keep generations of students from achieving their full potential.”

The Education department provides roughly 10% of funding for public education, with the vast majority of funding coming from state and local taxes.

The majority of Americans also appear opposed to ending the department, with a Marist poll in early March showing 63% of U.S. residents either oppose or strongly oppose getting rid of the U.S. Department of Education, while 37% of residents either strongly support or support abolishing the department.

Thérèse Boudreaux

Related Topics:#TheCenterSquare DepartmentOfEducation ThereseBoudreaux TrumpClosingEducationDepartment

Up Next

Mark Carney admits he may have to recuse himself on certain matters due to conflicts of interest

Don't Miss

Social workers get millions to push DEI in schools

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Europe Can’t Survive Without America

Artificial Intelligence / 3 hours ago

Apple faces proposed class action over its lag in Apple Intelligence

Health / 10 hours ago

Dr. Pierre Kory Exposes the Truth About the Texas ‘Measles Death’ Hoax

Artificial Intelligence

Apple faces proposed class action over its lag in Apple Intelligence

Published on March 25, 2025

Todayville

News release from The Deep View

Apple, already moving slowly out of the gate on generative AI, has been dealing with a number of roadblocks and mounting delays in its effort to bring a truly AI-enabled Siri to market. The problem, or, one of the problems, is that Apple used these same AI features to heavily promote its latest iPhone, which, as it says on its website, was “built for Apple Intelligence.”

Now, the tech giant has been accused of false advertising in a proposed class action lawsuit that argues that Apple’s “pervasive” marketing campaign was “built on a lie.”

The details: Apple has — if reluctantly — acknowledged delays on a more advanced Siri, pulling one of the ads that demonstrated the product and adding a disclaimer to its iPhone 16 product page that the feature is “in development and will be available with a future software update.”

But that, to the plaintiffs, isn’t good enough. Apple, according to the complaint, has “deceived millions of consumers into purchasing new phones they did not need based on features that do not exist, in violation of multiple false advertising and consumer protection laws.”
Apple “enriched itself by saving the costs they reasonably should have spent on ensuring that the (iPhones) had the technical capabilities advertised,” according to the complaint.

Apple did not respond to a request for comment.

The lawsuit was first reported by Axios, and can be read here.

This all comes amid an executive shuffling that just took place over at Apple HQ, which put Vision Pro creator Mike Rockwell in charge of the Siri overhaul, according to Bloomberg.

Still, shares of Apple rallied to close the day up around 2%, though the stock is still down 12% for the year.

Business

28 energy leaders call for eliminating ALL energy subsidies—even ones they benefit from

Published on March 24, 2025

Todayville

Energy Talking Points by Alex Epstein

Alex Epstein

This is the kind of integrity we need from industry—and from Congress.

28 energy leaders just called for the elimination of all IRA subsidies—even ones that benefit their companies.

The full letter is below (PDF here).

Dear Chairman Smith and Chairman Crapo:

We, the undersigned American energy producers and investors, write to voice our principled support for full repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act’s (IRA) energy subsidies, including subsidies that would appear to be to our firms’ and industry’s benefit. This is the only moral and practical path forward if we are to truly unleash American energy.

In recent weeks, Congress has been embroiled in battles over which, if any, of the IRA energy subsidies to cut. Lobbyists representing every corner of the energy landscape, including trade groups that many of us are part of, are jockeying to preserve their own piece of the pie, claiming that it is uniquely valuable.

We have oil lobbyists fighting to keep carbon capture and hydrogen subsidies, solar and wind lobbyists fighting to keep solar and wind subsidies, biofuel lobbyists fighting to keep biofuel subsidies, and EV lobbyists fighting to keep EV subsidies.

If this continues, we will likely preserve most if not all of the subsidies, which, deep down, everyone knows are not good for America.

The fundamental truth about subsidies is very simple. For any product, including energy, a subsidy is just a way of taking money from more efficient producers—and from taxpayers—and giving it to less efficient producers. The result is always less efficient production and therefore higher costs or lower quality for Americans.

The most egregious example of subsidies’ destructiveness is the IRA’s solar and wind subsidies, which pay electric utilities to invest much more money in solar and wind than they otherwise would, and thus much less in coal and gas than they otherwise would. Ultimately this means higher electricity prices and certainly less electricity reliability for Americans.

The IRA subsidies’ devastating harm to American energy is more than enough to compel us, as energy producers, to oppose them.

But their harm goes far beyond energy, as they will dramatically increase our debt and ultimately undermine every aspect of our economy.

A central Congressional priority is to curb the national debt during the upcoming budget reconciliation exercise. But according to credible estimates, the IRA will cost over $1 trillion over the next decade and trillions more after that. Worse, the IRA subsidies are expected to misallocate, into uncompetitive business and jobs, $3 trillion of investment by 2032 and $11 trillion by 2050. That’s a disaster for our economy, and for real job opportunities.

Clearly, the right thing to do is to eliminate all these subsidies. When lobbyists say that these subsidies are essential for America, what they’re really saying is that their backers have made investments in projects that have no near term cost-effectiveness and that are totally dependent on indefinite subsidies to sustain themselves.

Most people know the truth, but are afraid to say it due to institutional pressures. Too many Congressmen are afraid of alienating trade groups. Too many trade groups are afraid of alienating their large and vocal members who have made investments hoping for indefinite subsidies. All the while, too few are talking about freedom.

That’s why we invite our colleagues to do the right thing: level with the American people, say that we made a mistake, and that those who built subsidy-dependent businesses took on the kind of risk that we do not want to reward.

Keeping the IRA subsidies—despite all the evidence that they benefit only special interests at the expense of America—risks making our nation ever more like Europe, where industries do not succeed by providing the best value to consumers, but by providing the best favors to politicians. That’s not the America we want to work in.

Sincerely,

Bud Brigham, Founder, Atlas Energy Services and Brigham Exploration

David Albin, Managing Partner, Spectra Holdings

Adam Anderson, CEO, Innovex International

Thurmon Andress, Chairman and CEO, Andress Oil

Don Bennett, Managing Partner, Bennett Ventures LP

Greg Bird, CEO and President, Jetta Operating Company

David de Roode, Partner, Lockton

Andy Eidson, CEO, Alpha Metallurgical Resources

Matt Gallagher, President and CEO, Greenlake Energy

Mike Howard, CEO, Howard Energy

Justin Thompson, CEO, Iron Senergy

Ed Kovalik, CEO, Prairie Operating Company

Thomas E. Knauff, Executive Chairman, EDP

Lance Langford, CEO, Langford Energy Partners

Mickey McKee, CEO, Kodiak Gas Services

Mike O’Shaughnessy, CEO, Lario Oil and Gas Company

D. Martin Phillips, Founder, EnCap Investments LP

Karl Pfluger, midstream executive

David Rees-Jones, President, Chief Energy

Rob Roosa, CEO, Brigham Royalties

Bobby Shackouls, Former CEO, Burlington Resources

Ross Stevens, Founder and CEO, Stone Ridge Holdings Group

Kyle Stallings, CEO, Desert Royalty Company

Justin Thompson, CEO, Iron Senergy

Mike Wallace, Partner, Wallace Family Partnership

Ladd Wilks, CEO, ProFrac

Denzil West, CEO, Admiral Permian Operating

Bill Zartler, Founder and CEO, Solaris Oilfield Infrastructure

Additional signatories (email ted@energyfreedom.org to add yours):

Jimmy Brock, Executive Chairman, Core Natural Resources

Ted Williams, President and CEO, Rockport Energy Solutions LLC

To make sure as many politicians as possible see this letter, help us by sharing on Twitter/X and tagging your Congressmen! Congress is currently undecided about what to do about the IRA subsidies, so now is the moment to make your voice heard.

Share

“Energy Talking Points by Alex Epstein” is my free Substack newsletter designed to give as many people as possible

access to concise, powerful, well-referenced talking points on the latest energy, environmental,

and climate issues from a pro-human, pro-energy perspective.

Subscribe to Energy Talking Points by Alex Epstein

Share Energy Talking Points by Alex Epstein