In Emergency Appeal, Trump Urges Supreme Court to Allow Overhaul of Education Department

The Trump administration has taken its fight to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education to the Supreme Court. On June 6, President Trump filed an emergency appeal asking the justices to overturn lower court rulings that have blocked his plan to shut down the department and lay off over a thousand employees. It’s part of Trump’s long-standing campaign pledge to shift control of education policy from the federal government to the states.

Appeal

Solicitor General John Sauer submitted the appeal, arguing that district courts are overstepping their authority. He stated the Constitution gives the Executive Branch—not federal judges—the power to decide how many employees an agency needs and who should be kept or let go.

The appeal comes after a judge’s order blocked the mass termination of employees scheduled to stop receiving paychecks on June 9. Trump’s executive order, signed in March, directed Education Secretary Linda McMahon to start closing the department. But the courts have ruled that such a dramatic move can’t happen without congressional approval.

Rulings

U.S. District Judge Myong Joun was the first to block the layoffs in May. He found that firing over 1,300 workers crippled the department’s ability to deliver federally mandated education services. The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals backed Joun’s decision, noting that the administration failed to prove that the department could still function effectively without those employees.

Judge David Barron, writing for the appeals panel, made it clear that this isn’t just about internal staffing choices—it’s about whether a nearly 50-year-old department will continue to fulfill its legal responsibilities or be dismantled without legislative approval.

Cuts

When Trump began his second term in January, the Department of Education had 4,133 employees. The administration planned to slash that number by almost half through a mix of voluntary buyouts and forced layoffs. Services like student loans would be shifted to the Small Business Administration, while special education oversight would move to the Department of Health and Human Services.

Critics, however, say this reshuffling doesn’t align with federal law. Programs like Title IV of the Higher Education Act require a federal body to manage student loans, issue grants, and protect student rights.

Order

Judge Joun’s May 22 ruling didn’t just block the reorganization—it also required the department to rehire the laid-off workers. Yet, as of early June, none had been reinstated. The administration also failed to present any plan to bring them back, prompting legal pressure from states, school districts, and teachers’ unions.

A hearing was scheduled for June 9 to evaluate whether the department is complying with the court’s reinstatement order.

Argument

The Justice Department argues that forcing the agency to rehire workers during ongoing litigation harms the government more than it helps the plaintiffs. They’re urging the Supreme Court to act quickly to lift the block and allow the reorganization to proceed.

But the states and school districts say the agency’s functions—like overseeing special education, ensuring equitable funding, and running college aid programs—are required by law. Simply shifting these responsibilities to other agencies doesn’t remove those legal obligations.

While Trump’s plan may appeal to some conservative voters who believe education should be state-controlled, legal experts say it would take an act of Congress to officially eliminate the Department of Education. Until that happens, the courts seem determined to hold the line.

FAQs