Trump Can't Legally Dismantle the Department of Education

But it doesn't mean he won't try, and his policies threaten us all.

President Trump has given the newly confirmed secretary for the Department of Education Linda McMahon a directive to dismantle the agency she heads. The “brutal logic” of this, in the words of education journalist

Jennifer Berkshire

, is to roll back the gains of the Civil Rights movement and make it harder for students to go to college, as part of a larger program to harm higher education as a whole.

Part of the work of the AAUP’s Center for the Defense of Academic Freedom is to utilize the unique expertise of the fellows to create “Action Reports” that provide insight and guidance to individuals and organizations looking to fight these changes. The CDAF recently released an action report on Trump’s plans for the Department of Education authored by CDAF fellow, Tariq Habash: "Trump Can't Actually Dismantle the Department of Education, but His Policies Still Threaten Us All."

I had a chance to ask Tariq Habash about the report and other current issues at the Department of Education. 

Tariq is a founder and director of A New Policy and a Leadership in Government Fellow with Open Society Foundations. He most recently served as a political appointee and policy advisor in the US Department of Education. Tariq led the policy office’s student loan portfolio, regulatory policy planning, and budget development across higher education issues. He was the second government official and the first political appointee to publicly resign from the Biden administration due to its policy on Gaza and unrestricted support for Israel’s aggression against Palestinians.

John Warner: What was your role on the inside of the Department of Education?

Tariq Habash: Thanks, John; I started working in the Department of Education in the first couple of weeks of the Biden Administration. I was in the Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development (OPEPD), which is kind of the brain center of the Department’s long-term policy development and planning. We housed offices of the budget, education technology, grants policy, student privacy, and many other functions, and reported directly to the Office of the Secretary. When the Department is involved in interagency work (coordinating with Labor, Health and Human Services, Treasury, or the White House) those interactions often go through OPEPD. We managed the Departmental clearance process, effectively overseeing every letter, policy document, and regulation before they were finalized. In OPEPD, no day ever looks the same; you are constantly thinking about the long-term impact of the policy work of the agency. My specific role was overseeing many of the functions of the higher education portfolio, including student loans, federal financial aid, and rules and regulations affecting colleges and universities.

JW: I think most folks are aware of the existence of the Department of Education, but given that direct responsibility for K-12 schools falls to various state and local entities, and higher education is a cobbled-together system of public, private non-profit, and for-profit entities, it’s not always clear what the department is designed to do. What is the role of a federal Department of Education?

TH: The Department of Education plays a critical role in promoting and increasing access to and quality of education across the United States. While state and local entities manage K-12 schools and higher education institutions, the Department ensures federal funding is appropriately allocated and that schools comply with civil rights and other relevant laws. Further, the Department is focused on improving education for all students, and it does this by distributing grants to support programs that improve outcomes and collecting important data to inform the policies. In higher education, the Department also supports efforts to increase access and affordability of colleges and universities, while also ensuring accountability that schools are providing value to students. The Department administers federal financial aid programs like Pell Grants, Direct Loans, and work-study initiatives, which help millions of students access a postsecondary education. The Department enforces laws to prevent discrimination, oversees accreditation agencies, and coordinates with states to protect students from predatory practices.

JW: There’s a lot of stuff there, but I want to ask specifically about the grants. These are the kinds of things that are often criticized as “wasteful,” but my experience is that it’s the opposite: the grants allow for very direct and important impacts on the lives of students and families. What’s an example of something the Department of Education makes possible?

TH: That’s exactly right. Grants are extremely impactful ways the government can provide critical support for marginalized communities, whether it grants to institutions through Title III and V programs or grants directly to students and families, like the Pell Grant, these programs have a direct impact on educational opportunities for some of the most vulnerable and underserved students across the country. Even more so, the Department of Education goes to incredible lengths to ensure that these grants have the greatest impact through rigorous data collection and evaluation of the various grant programs to ensure that every dollar is invested effectively. This is anything but wasteful from the government’s perspective; grants are a long-term investment in our students, our economy, and our communities.

JW: As you say in the “Action Report” you prepared for the Center for the Defense of Academic Freedom, the Republican desire to get rid of the Department of Education is nothing new. From their perspective, giving as much credit to their point of view as possible, what’s their beef?

TH: Conservatives often decry the Department as an inefficient bureaucracy, but, in reality, the clear focus on evidence-based practices and wanting to allocate resources to the most effective programs undermines their entire argument. The reality is that the Department of Education’s mission is to ensure equitable opportunities for all students; it is a federal agency borne out of the civil rights era. The Republican critique is, fundamentally, that the idea that all students should have access to a high-quality education is unsatisfactory. This perspective is rooted in racism and control, specifically, control of who gets to learn, who gets to decide what is taught, and who gets the appropriate resources to do it well.

JW: But there’s a larger, ideological goal at work underneath all of this, right?

TH: I think there absolutely is because it is not just about education. It is about all public services, all programs that support vulnerable communities. The same people who believe the Department of Education should be abolished also believe we shouldn’t have safety guardrails and that OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) should be eliminated. It’s the same people who don’t think all Americans should pay into Social Security because they have no interest in caring about the elderly and the same people who want to get rid of SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families), Medicare, and Medicaid. It is all connected and undermining the way our society learns and the way we get our information; this is the fastest way to achieve the splintering effect they seek.

JW: Trump and his allies are painting eliminating the Department as relatively inconsequential, saying that it will cede control of schools to the states and localities. What’s wrong with this view? What are the foreseeable problems (catastrophes even) of getting rid of the Department of Education?

TH: It ignores the reality of what would actually happen. For one, the Department plays a vital role in distributing federal funds for low-income schools, and without the Department, there is no guarantee those dollars would continue to exist. In practice, that means schools shut down, and under-resourced schools have even fewer resources, older books, broken desks and chairs, fewer teachers, and fewer jobs in the community. And that doesn’t even begin to factor in the economic consequences for higher education, where many colleges and universities rely on federal funding and federal loans to survive from semester to semester. You cut off those resources, even temporarily, and you’ll probably see hundreds of schools close overnight. When that happens as a one-off circumstance it has devastating effects on the students and community. When it’s dozens or hundreds at once? It could feel much more like a localized recession, particularly in communities where the university is the primary economic driver.

JW: They just announced a huge number of layoffs from the Department, while also claiming that this is not going to affect things like Pell Grants or the competitive grant system. Does this sound plausible?

TH: To be clear, the layoffs the Trump administration is pushing are entirely illegal. Ultimately this effort will undermine every aspect of the Department’s mission if it is not challenged, and the impact to both students and schools will still be severe. In just one example, the day after the illegal cuts, the FAFSA (Free Application for Federal Student Aid) website went dark. The reduction in force eliminated many of the regional offices tasked with compliance with federal laws, including huge swaths of critical staff from the Office for Civil Rights to school compliance divisions to those supporting special education to vendor oversight and accountability. In all likelihood, the system was already spread too thin, and it's more than plausible that we will see real people affected.

JW: Tell us more about the “Action Report” you wrote as part of your work for the AAUP’s Center for the Defense of Academic Freedom. Why do it? How should people be using it?

TH: I originally wrote the action report prior to Trump’s inauguration, as a grounding effort to emphasize the importance of the Department of Education but also to inform those across education and civil society who may not understand how the Department’s work actually serves millions of Americans every day, whether they realize it or not. And insofar as the Trump administration actually took steps to undermine the Department’s core functions and mission, I felt it crucial to articulate the direct consequences such actions would have on underserved students, schools, institutions, and our economy.

Ultimately, crafting this kind of report is an effort to defend and protect the values within our education system; values that are now at risk if the Department’s role is undermined or diminished.

JW: You have a call to action at the end. What should we be doing about this attack and others on government capacity?

TH: The call to action is for the millions of Americans who care about the future of our country, of education, and of future generations, to stand up and advocate for the preservation of so many critical programs that help ensure that every student, regardless of background, has the opportunity to succeed.

—

Previously at Academic Freedom on the Line:

“The Worst Thing That Could Happen Is Mass Capitulation”

“How Should We Respond to Executive Power Abuses”

The views expressed in this newsletter are those of individual contributors and not those of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) or the AAUP’s Center for the Defense of Academic Freedom.