U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen, right, meets with Maryland resident Kilmar Abrego Garcia in El Salvador on April 17, 2025. Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat, had been seeking a meeting with Abrego Garcia after the administration said it mistakenly deported him to a mega-prison in his home country. (Photo via Van Hollen on X.)

This story was updated at 6:01 p.m. Eastern.

Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, the Maryland resident the Trump administration erroneously deported to his native El Salvador, appeared to be in good health and had been moved from a notorious mega-prison to another detention center, as his case tests the limits of executive power to override due process rights in the United States, Sen. Chris Van Hollen told reporters Friday.

Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat, met Thursday with Abrego Garcia and briefed reporters on the visit after landing Friday afternoon at Dulles International Airport outside Washington, D.C.

The meeting with Van Hollen was Abrego Garcia’s first contact outside of the U.S. and El Salvador immigration and legal systems since he was deported in March, the senator said.

“His conversation with me was the first communication he’d had with anybody outside a prison since he was abducted,” Van Hollen said Friday. 

Accompanied by Abrego Garcia’s wife, mother and brother at Dulles, Van Hollen said he’d been preparing to catch his plane out of El Salvador Thursday evening when he got word from the U.S. embassy that he would be able to meet with Abrego Garcia.

The meeting came at the end of Van Hollen’s second day in the country, where he faced difficulties securing an in-person meeting or phone call with the Salvadoran citizen. The second-term senator traveled to the Central American country this week to urge the Salvadoran government to release Abrego Garcia and to meet with him.

Abrego Garcia told Van Hollen he’d been taken to a detention center in Baltimore, Van Hollen said Friday. From there, he was transported to Texas and then flown to El Salvador, where he was detained at the notorious mega-prison Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT.

Abrego Garcia was moved on April 9 from CECOT to another El Salvador detention center, Van Hollen reported. The conditions at the new prison were better, but Abrego Garcia was still denied access to the outside world, including communication with his family or lawyers, which is a violation of international law, Van Hollen said.

The meeting occurred under close supervision from Salvadoran officials, Van Hollen said, but Abrego Garcia appeared in adequate health.

“On a very cursory examination, he appeared OK,” Van Hollen said.

Van Hollen on Thursday shared a picture on social media of his meeting with Abrego Garcia, who appeared in civilian clothes.

Constitutional conflict

While he said Abrego Garcia’s individual case was tragic, Van Hollen said it had even larger implications for the strength of constitutional rights to due process.

“This should not be an issue for Republicans or Democrats,” he said. “This is an issue for every American who cares about our Constitution, who cares about personal liberty, who cares about due process and who cares about what makes America so different, which is adherence to all of those things. This is an American issue.”

Noting that the administration has ignored federal courts at every level — including a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last week that President Donald Trump’s administration must “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return to the United States — Van Hollen said officials at the U.S. embassy in El Salvador told him they had not received any instruction from the administration to seek his release.

“It’s very clear that the president, the Trump administration, are blatantly, flagrantly disagreeing with, defying, the order from the Supreme Court,” he said.

White House says ‘he’s NOT coming back’

The Trump administration, which has admitted in court that Abrego Garcia’s deportation stemmed from an “administrative error,” continued Friday to be steadfast in refusing to return him.

The Trump administration has criticized Van Hollen’s advocacy for Abrego Garcia, and the White House targeted the senator on social media Friday.

“Oh, and by the way, @ChrisVanHollen — he’s NOT coming back,” a post on X from the official White House account read. The post included an illustration of a New York Times headline on the meeting, with two sections crossed out and replaced with administration claims about Abrego Garcia. 

The administration has claimed there are logistical reasons it cannot repatriate Abrego Garcia, but some — including a Reagan-appointed federal appeals court judge on Thursday — have said the executive branch is defying the Supreme Court order.

Payments to El Salvador

Van Hollen said the Trump administration has promised to pay El Salvador up to $15 million to detain the prisoners, but noted that Democrats in the U.S. Senate are not “totally powerless” to stop those payments.

“Appropriations need to go through the Congress, and that $15 million, you can be sure we’re going to be looking for where it is because that wasn’t authorized in previous appropriations,” he said.

He said that while Democrats are in the minority in both houses of Congress, they could block any Senate funding bill that included payments for detention in El Salvador.

“You can be sure that I won’t support the use of one penny of taxpayer dollars to keep Abrego Garcia illegally detained in El Salvador,” he said. 

Prisoners look out of their cell as Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem tours the Terrorist Confinement Center, or CECOT, on March 26, 2025 in Tecoluca, El Salvador. (Photo by Alex Brandon-Pool/Getty Images)

U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen said Thursday that soldiers blocked him from entering a notorious mega-prison in El Salvador where the erroneously deported Maryland resident Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia has been held for more than a month.

The Maryland Democrat arrived in the Central American country Wednesday in an effort to help bring Abrego Garcia, whom the Justice Department admitted in court was deported in error, back to the United States, or at least check on his wellness. He met with El Salvador Vice President Félix Ulloa that day, who denied his requests to either visit or speak on the phone with Abrego Garcia.

Van Hollen told reporters Thursday afternoon that he again tried to make contact with Abrego Garcia that morning.

A U.S. immigration judge issued a protective order in 2019 finding that sending Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran citizen, back to his home country would put him in grave danger.

Accompanied by Chris Newman — the lawyer for Abrego Garcia’s wife and his mother — Van Hollen said they tried to enter Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT, but soldiers stopped them at a checkpoint about three kilometers from the prison.

“We were told by the soldiers that they’d been ordered not to allow us to proceed any further than that point,” Van Hollen said.

Van Hollen said that since Abrego Garcia was sent to CECOT, he has not spoken with anyone outside of the prison walls, and “this inability to communicate with his lawyers is a violation of international law.”

The senator pointed out that El Salvador is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

“That covenant says, and I quote, ‘A detained or imprisoned person shall be entitled to communicate and consult with his legal counsel,’” he said.

Van Hollen also said he met with the U.S. Embassy in El Salvador and they discussed “the full range of important bilateral relations between the United States and El Salvador.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt and other Republicans have criticized Van Hollen for making the trip, repeating the accusation that Abrego Garcia is a gang member.

Representatives for the White House and DHS did not respond to messages seeking comment Thursday.

Appeals court slams administration’s inaction

Meanwhile, Abrego Garcia’s case continues to work its way through U.S. courts as a flashpoint conflict between two branches of government that has led to the precipice of a constitutional crisis.

On Thursday, a federal appeals court panel dismantled the administration’s latest appeal, saying the government had done “essentially nothing” to attempt to return Abrego Garcia in compliance with last week’s Supreme Court order.

A three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit said the executive branch was due deference in conducting foreign policy, but that the administration’s inaction in seeking Abrego Garcia’s return amounted to defiance of a judicial order.

The unanimous ruling was written by Fourth Circuit Chief Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III, who was nominated by Republican President Ronald Reagan. The other two judges, Robert Bruce King and Stephanie Thacker, were nominated by Democratic presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

“The government is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process that is the foundation of our constitutional order. Further, it claims in essence that because it has rid itself of custody that there is nothing that can be done,” the panel wrote. “This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear.”

The appeals ruling responded to the government’s appeal of U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis’ order this week for the Trump administration to offer evidence on how it has sought to help with Abrego Garcia’s release from CECOT.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last week that the Trump administration must “facilitate” — but stopped short of requiring — his return to the United States.

In unusually frank language, the Fourth Circuit panel warned Thursday the conflict between the executive and judicial branches threatened the foundation of U.S. government.

“If today the Executive claims the right to deport without due process and in disregard of court orders, what assurance will there be tomorrow that it will not deport American citizens and then disclaim responsibility to bring them home?” the court asked. “And what assurance shall there be that the Executive will not train its broad discretionary powers upon its political enemies? The threat, even if not the actuality, would always be present.”

Near the end of the order, the panel urged the administration to obey the judicial branch.

“We yet cling to the hope that it is not naïve to believe our good brethren in the Executive Branch perceive the rule of law as vital to the American ethos,” the judges wrote. “This case presents their unique chance to vindicate that value and to summon the best that is within us while there is still time.”

Neither country taking action

The Fourth Circuit panel pointed out that the leaders of both the United States and El Salvador claimed they had no power to return Abrego Garcia.

“We are told that neither government has the power to act,” they wrote. “The result will be to leave matters generally and Abrego Garcia specifically in an interminable limbo without recourse to law of any sort.”

During a White House visit this week, El Salvador President Nayib Bukele said he would not bring Abrego Garcia back to the United States.

The Trump administration has admitted in court that Abrego Garcia’s deportation stemmed from an “administrative error.” The administration continues to accuse him of being part of the gang MS-13, despite no charges or convictions of any criminal offenses against him, including gang-related crimes.

Jacob Fischler contributed to this report.

Solar panels in Damariscotta, Maine. (Photo by Evan Houk/ Maine Morning Star)

WASHINGTON — The legal battle over a Biden-era climate program ramped up late Wednesday when an appeals court halted a federal judge’s ruling requiring the disbursement of those funds.

The ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit will keep funds frozen in Citibank accounts while a federal suit over the program is ongoing.

The appeals court order reversed a preliminary injunction that U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan of the District of Columbia issued Tuesday that temporarily barred the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from “unlawfully suspending or terminating” grant awards.

The appeals panel said it had not had access to Chutkan’s opinion explaining her order granting an injunction — which came a day after the order itself — and the trial judge had therefore not met the high bar needed to issue a preliminary injunction. The panel’s order “should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits,” the judges said.

“The purpose of this order is to give the court sufficient opportunity to consider the district court’s forthcoming opinion in support of its order granting a preliminary injunction together with” the government’s appeal, the judges wrote.

Chutkan issued her opinion the day after granting the preliminary injunction, pointing out that “for weeks, despite repeated inquiries to Citibank and EPA, Plaintiffs received little to no communication from EPA or Citibank regarding their inability to access their funds.”

“Overnight, billions of dollars appropriated by Congress were frozen. As a result, nationwide projects were halted, workplans were disrupted, and millions of dollars in approved transactions with committed partners could not be disbursed,” she wrote.

On Thursday, the D.C. Circuit panel asked the government to refile its argument responding to Chutkan’s opinion by 5 p.m. Eastern on Saturday.

Fight over funding

Climate United Fund and other organizations sued President Donald Trump’s administration and Citibank in March over money frozen in the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund.

The $27 billion initiative, which provides funding to organizations building for energy-efficient projects and other measures to tackle climate change, was authorized by Congress as part of the Inflation Reduction Act that Democrats passed along party lines and President Joe Biden signed into law in 2022.

Chutkan’s order blocked the administration from “directly or indirectly impeding” Citibank or causing the bank to “deny, obstruct, delay, or otherwise limit access to funds in accounts established in connection with” the organizations’ grants.

The Trump administration quickly challenged that ruling Wednesday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

The higher court temporarily blocked Chutkan’s decision “pending further order.”

The appeals court’s ruling halts Chutkan’s preliminary injunction to the extent that it “enables or requires Citibank to release, disburse, transfer, otherwise move, or allow access to funds.”

The higher court also prevented the Trump administration from having to file a status report with the district court within 24 hours of the preliminary injunction’s entry that confirmed their compliance, as outlined in Chutkan’s ruling.

The appeals court also ordered that “no party take any action, directly or indirectly, with regard to the disputed contracts, grants, awards or funds.”

The EPA said in March it would be terminating $20 billion in grants under the program, and the agency’s administrator Lee Zeldin described the climate initiative as a “gold bar” scheme.

Climate United Fund did not immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday, and the EPA declined to comment. 

Protesters outside the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland in Greenbelt rally on April 4, 2025, in support of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a Maryland father who was deported to El Salvador in an “administrative error,” calling for him to be returned to the U.S. (Photo by Ariana Figueroa/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen said Wednesday he was denied a meeting with Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, an El Salvador-born Maryland resident who was mistakenly deported to a mega-prison in his home country notorious for human rights abuses.

The Maryland Democrat met with El Salvador Vice President Félix Ulloa in the Central American country in an effort to help bring Abrego Garcia back to the United States. Abrego Garcia is a citizen of El Salvador, but a U.S. immigration judge issued a protective order in 2019 finding that sending him back to his home country would put him in grave danger.

After meeting with Ulloa, Van Hollen briefed reporters on the visit and said the Salvadoran vice president rebuffed his requests for contact with Abrego Garcia.

“I asked the vice president if I could meet with Mr. Abrego Garcia and he said, ‘Well, you need to make earlier provisions to go visit CECOT (Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo),’” Van Hollen told reporters in El Salvador, referring to the mega-prison.

“I said, ‘I’m not interested, at this moment, in taking a tour of CECOT, I just want to meet with Mr. Abrego Garcia,’” Van Hollen said.

“He said he was not able to make that happen. He said he’d need a little more time. I asked him if I came back next week, whether I’d be able to see Mr. Abrego Garcia. He said he couldn’t promise that either,” the senator added. 

Van Hollen said he was also denied a phone or video call with Abrego Garcia to ask how he was doing and report that information to his family. 

The senator said he would contact the U.S. Embassy in El Salvador and request they ask the government of El Salvador to connect the two of them via phone, following a suggestion from Ulloa.

Van Hollen’s visit came a day after a federal judge in Maryland ordered the Trump administration to offer evidence on how it has sought to help with Abrego Garcia’s release from CECOT.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last week that the Trump administration must “facilitate” — but did not require — his return to the United States. El Salvador President Nayib Bukele also said Monday that he would not bring Abrego Garcia back to the United States.

The Trump administration has acknowledged in court that Abrego Garcia was deported due to an “administrative error.”

The administration accused him of being a member of the gang MS-13. He has not been charged or convicted of any criminal offenses, including gang-related crimes.

Van Hollen, noting that the Trump administration “illegally abducted” Abrego Garcia, said he “won’t stop trying” to get the wrongly deported man out of the prison and back to Maryland and predicted others would follow.

“I can assure the president, the vice president, that I may be the first United States senator to visit El Salvador on this issue, but there will be more, and there will be more members of Congress coming,” he said.

Administration responds

Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security posted on social media Wednesday a copy of a restraining order Abrego Garcia’s wife sought against him in 2021 “claiming he punched, scratched, and ripped off her shirt, among other harm.”

In response, Abrego Garcia’s wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura, told Newsweek she had a disagreement with him, but that things did not escalate and she did not continue with the civil court process. 

Late Wednesday afternoon, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt made a statement on the case, displaying the restraining order, repeating the accusation Abrego Garcia is a gang member and objecting to media references to him as a “Maryland father.”

“There is no Maryland father,” she said.

Patty Morin, the mother of a Maryland woman slain by a Salvadoran immigrant in the country without legal status, also appeared at the briefing and spoke in favor of the Trump administration’s aggressive deportation actions.

Children engaged in sensory exercises, often used in special education classrooms. (Photo by Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — As President Donald Trump takes drastic steps to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education, disability advocates are worried about whether the agency can carry out its responsibilities to serve students with disabilities.

Representatives of several disability advocacy groups cited “chaos,” “fear” and “uncertainty” in describing the situation to States Newsroom. They said there’s a lack of clarity about both proposed changes within the realm of special education services and the impact overall of sweeping shifts at the agency, calling into question whether the department can deliver on its congressionally mandated guarantees for students with disabilities.

“It’s only been a few weeks since these things started happening, so I don’t think we’re seeing any of the effects trickle down right now, but we do have parents reaching out to us, calling and feeling really scared,” said Robyn Linscott, director of education and family policy at The Arc of the United States, an advocacy group for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Among the department’s chief responsibilities is guaranteeing a free public education for students with disabilities through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, and enforcing Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, part of which bars programs and activities receiving federal funding from discrimination on the basis of disability.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act was enacted in 1975 under a different title and later renamed in 1990.

IDEA “governs how states and public agencies provide early intervention, special education, and related services” to students with disabilities, per the department.

The department notes that before the 1975 law, “many children were denied access to education and opportunities to learn” and in 1970, “U.S. schools educated only one in five children with disabilities.” 

According to the National Center for Education Statistics, 15% of all public school students in the country received services through IDEA during the 2022-2023 school year.

In fiscal year 2024, $15.4 billion was appropriated for IDEA.

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 states that: “No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States … shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

Closing the department

Trump signed an executive order in March that called on Education Secretary Linda McMahon to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure” of the agency to the maximum extent she’s permitted to by law.

The department also announced earlier that month that it would be slashing more than 1,300 positions through a “reduction in force,” or RIF effort, sparking widespread concerns about how the department could deliver on its core functions.

For special education services, advocates question significant cuts to units like the Office for Civil Rights, which is tasked with investigating discrimination complaints, including those that are disability-based.

Linscott said parents are asking questions such as: “‘What does this mean? Is my child still going to be able to have an (Individualized Education Program)? Is the state going to be required to uphold the IDEA? Or, I have a pending complaint with (the Office for Civil Rights), what does this mean for how long it’s going to take to settle this case or to investigate this claim?’”

Heather Eckner, director of statewide education at the Autism Alliance of Michigan, said it’s been “all-consuming” trying to keep up with what she calls a “chaos factory,” noting that it’s a lot of work for advocacy groups and policy analysts “to try to sort through and figure out what’s real, what’s actually happening, what might happen, and where the impact might be.”

“Ultimately, this is just having a significant destabilizing effect,” said Eckner, whose statewide organization focuses on expanding opportunities for people with autism.

Moving special education services to HHS

That uncertainty also stems from Trump’s announcement in March that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services “will be handling special needs.”

The proposal sparked concern and confusion among disability advocates, both for what that transfer would look like and the legality of the proposed move. 

The president offered little detail into the proposal, but HHS secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said on social media that the agency is “fully prepared” to take on that responsibility.

Meanwhile, HHS is witnessing its own drastic changes and restructuring, including beginning to lay off 10,000 workers — further calling into question how that agency could take on the Education Department’s special education services.

In response to a request for comment, HHS directed States Newsroom to Kennedy’s social media post regarding the proposed transfer but did not provide any further details.

“We have a lot of concerns over both the legality of that, but also just what that means for kind of how we view the education of students with disabilities in general, and how do we view disability in this country, and then what those actual implications on students are,” Linscott said. 

Jennifer Coco, interim executive director at the Center for Learner Equity, told States Newsroom that any move to separate the education of students with disabilities from the education of all students “further pathologizes disability and is treating 15% of all the children in our public school buildings like they’re medical issues — they’re not.”

“They are students who learn differently, a vast majority of whom could learn at the same grade level as their peers if they were provided appropriate instruction,” said Coco, whose national nonprofit focuses on ensuring students with disabilities have access to quality educational opportunities, including public school choice.

Any transfer of responsibility for these federal laws, such as IDEA, would require an act of Congress — a significant undertaking given that at least 60 votes are needed to break through the Senate’s filibuster and Republicans, with their narrow majority, hold just 53 seats.

The Education Department told States Newsroom that no action has been taken to move federally mandated programs out of the agency at this time.

“As President Trump and Secretary McMahon have made clear, sunsetting the Department of Education will be done in partnership with Congress and national and state leaders to ensure all statutorily required programs are managed responsibly and where they best serve students and families,” Madi Biedermann, a spokesperson for the department, said in a statement shared with States Newsroom. 

The Lyndon Baines Johnson Department of Education Building in Washington, D.C., pictured on Nov. 25, 2024. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)

This story was updated at 6:44 p.m. EDT.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Education demanded in a letter to state education leaders on Thursday that they certify all K-12 schools in their states are complying with an earlier Dear Colleague letter banning diversity, equity and inclusion practices if they want to keep receiving federal financial assistance.

The department’s sweeping order gives K-12 state education agencies 10 days to collect the certifications of compliance from local school governing bodies, and then sign them and return them to the federal department.

The new demand stems from a February letter threatening to rescind federal funds for schools that use DEI, or race-conscious practices, in admissions, programming, training, hiring, scholarships and other aspects of student life.

Craig Trainor, the department’s acting assistant secretary for civil rights, said “federal financial assistance is a privilege, not a right,” in a statement Thursday.

“When state education commissioners accept federal funds, they agree to abide by federal antidiscrimination requirements,” Trainor said. He added that “unfortunately, we have seen too many schools flout or outright violate these obligations, including by using (diversity, equity and inclusion) programs to discriminate against one group of Americans to favor another based on identity characteristics in clear violation of Title VI.”

He did not cite examples in the statement.

Trainor said the department “is taking an important step toward ensuring that states understand — and comply with — their existing obligations under civil rights laws and Students v. Harvard.”

In the February letter, Trainor offered a wide-ranging interpretation of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2023 involving Harvard University and the University of North Carolina. The nation’s highest court struck down the use of affirmative action in college admissions.

Trainor wrote that though the ruling “addressed admissions decisions, the Supreme Court’s holding applies more broadly.”

The four-page letter raised a slew of questions for schools — from pre-K through college — over what exactly falls within the requirements. 

The department later released a Frequently Asked Questions document on the letter in an attempt to provide more guidance.

In the document, the department noted that it’s prohibited from “exercising control over the content of school curricula” and “nothing in Title VI, its implementing regulations, or the Dear Colleague Letter requires or authorizes a school to restrict any rights otherwise protected by the First Amendment.”

The agency also clarified that “programs focused on interests in particular cultures, heritages, and areas of the world” are allowed as long as “they are open to all students regardless of race.”

Teachers unions react

Meanwhile, legal challenges are already underway against the Dear Colleague letter, including one spearheaded by the American Federation of Teachers and another from the National Education Association. 

“In the middle of a school year, the president is trying to bully the very same school districts that he insisted, just a few weeks ago, should be in charge of education,” Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, said in a Thursday statement.

Weingarten added that “this is a power grab and a money grab — and it’s also blatantly unlawful.”

“We know the administration wants to divert federal education funds into block grants, vouchers or tax cuts, but it’s simply not legal; only Congress can do that. Further, federal statute explicitly prohibits any president from telling schools and colleges what to teach, and funds cannot be withheld on the basis of Title VI Civil Rights Act claims without due process,” she said. 

In a Thursday statement, Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association, said “educators and parents know that teaching should be guided by what is best for students, not by threat of illegal restrictions and punishment.”

“That is why we sued the Trump administration — and we stand by our lawsuit,” she said.

“This latest action by the Trump administration to shut down free speech and coerce educators to abandon inclusive practices at school remains illegal and unconstitutional as we pointed out in our legal filing,” she added. 

From left, U.S. Reps. Frederica Wilson of Florida and Gwen Moore of Wisconsin, U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon and U.S. Rep. Mark Takano of California, at a press conference outside the U.S. Department of Education organized by House Democrats. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — A press conference by a dozen U.S. House Democrats outside the U.S. Department of Education took an unusual turn on Wednesday when the subject of their criticism — Education Secretary Linda McMahon —  unexpectedly joined them.

The Democrats had met with the Trump administration appointee a few minutes earlier to press her about the sweeping shifts at the U.S. Department of Education, where she and President Donald Trump are seeking to dismantle the agency. 

The lawmakers told reporters that at the scheduled meeting, they questioned McMahon on how the department could carry out its primary responsibilities when the agency continues to see dramatic changes. That includes mass layoffs that hit core units and an executive order from Trump calling on the secretary to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure” of the department to the maximum extent she legally can.

Only Congress, which established the 45-year-old department, has the power to abolish it.

The Democrats said they were grateful that McMahon met with them but dissatisfied with and even alarmed by the secretary’s responses, especially on a timeline for closing the agency.

“It’s very apparent that the secretary is treating this as a corporate restructuring, and we want to be clear that the education of our children is not a corporate enterprise — it is how we move this country forward,” Rep. Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico said.

“It’s very clear that the (reduction in force), the firing of probationary staff, the so-called restructuring that’s happening — when we asked for a plan multiple times in this meeting, we were told there is not a plan yet,” she added.

The secretary arrives, and leaves

As the Democrats spoke, McMahon emerged from the building, accompanied by aides, and joined them at their lectern emblazoned with a U.S. House of Representatives logo.

She reiterated that “funding from the United States government will continue through the programs that have already been established” and said she looked forward to continuing to work with members of Congress on both sides of the aisle. 

After her remarks, Rep. Mark Takano pressed McMahon on when she would close the department.

“Well, we’ve had our discussions already, so thank you all very, very much for coming,” McMahon replied, proceeding to walk back into the building.

“You see, she’s not answering the question when she’s going to shut down the department,” Takano, of California, said as the secretary walked away.

Barred from building

Wednesday’s meeting came after Takano and other Democratic lawmakers were blocked from entering the building in February while trying to meet with Denise Carter, acting Education secretary at the time, over Trump’s plans to dismantle the agency.

The California Democrat had led dozens of others in writing a letter to Carter and requesting a meeting over those efforts.

A day after Trump signed the executive order surrounding the department, he announced that special education services would be transferred to the Department of Health and Human Services and that the Small Business Administration would be handling the student loan portfolio.

The department has not taken any steps to move either — both of which would require acts of Congress and raise a slew of logistical questions.

Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland said “the idea of dismembering the department and then parceling it out to other agencies and departments does not give us a lot of confidence or hope in what’s happening.”

The lawmakers said McMahon repeatedly stressed during the meeting that she plans to abide by federal law and would look carefully at what she’s legally allowed to do before moving any functions of the department.

Yet Rep. Greg Casar of Texas said he and the group “became more and more alarmed as the meeting went on,” noting that “current law won by so many Americans in this democracy, is that all kids deserve a decent education, that the money goes to your kid if they’re in need, the money goes to your kid no matter their race or their background or their neighborhood, and they want to change that.”

The lawmakers who met with McMahon included: U.S. Reps. Terri Sewell of Alabama; Takano; Frederica Wilson of Florida; Raskin and Sarah Elfreth of Maryland; Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire; Stansbury; Casar, Julie Johnson and Veronica Escobar of Texas; Don Beyer of Virginia; and Gwen Moore of Wisconsin.

A demonstrator holds a sign outside the U.S. Capitol on March 25, 2025, protesting the detainment by immigration authorities of Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — A group of progressive U.S. House Democrats on Tuesday rebuked the detainment by immigration authorities of Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil and demanded that he be released from a Louisiana detention center.

At a press conference steps outside the U.S. Capitol, Reps. Delia Ramirez of Illinois, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, Pramila Jayapal of Washington state and Greg Casar of Texas argued that Khalil’s First Amendment rights were violated, as the Syria-born lawful permanent resident appeared to be targeted for his activism and not any immigration violations.

“The detention and threatened deportation of Mahmoud is illegal, and it is a direct assault on our constitutional rights to due process, freedom of speech and right to protest and on dissent itself,” Tlaib said.

Vince Warren, executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights and Mike Zamore, national director of policy and government affairs at the American Civil Liberties Union, joined the members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus in speaking out against Khalil’s arrest Tuesday.

Both advocacy groups are among those providing legal representation for Khalil.

“We should also be clear that this is not a regular deportation proceeding,” Warren said.

“What this is is an attempt at disappearance, again, something that happens routinely in authoritarian countries, and it is happening right here.”

In a filing on Sunday, the administration alleged that Khalil did run afoul of immigration law, saying he lied on his permanent residency application when he “withheld membership in certain organizations and failed to disclose continuing employment by the Syria Office in the British Embassy in Beirut.”

Court challenge

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents arrested Khalil — a former Columbia University student who helped organize protests against the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza — in New York City this month. He was later moved to a detention facility in Louisiana.

Khalil challenged the lawfulness of his detention in a New York federal court, and a federal judge last week transferred his case to a court in New Jersey.

The administration claimed that Khalil “led activities aligned to Hamas, a designated terrorist organization” and is calling for his deportation.

President Donald Trump has vowed to crack down on students protesting against the war in Gaza.

He and his administration conflated Khalil’s protests of the war in Gaza with support for Hamas to rationalize the arrest.

Backlash

The lawmakers’ event Tuesday was part of the backlash against the arrest that civil rights groups view as targeting political speech.

Tlaib referenced a letter Khalil wrote inside the detention center, where he described his arrest as a “direct consequence” of exercising his right to free speech.

“The Trump administration is targeting me as part of a broader strategy to suppress dissent,” Khalil wrote. “Visa-holders, green-card carriers, and citizens alike will all be targeted for their political beliefs.”

Jayapal dubbed the administration’s actions regarding Khalil “unconstitutional.”

The Washington state Democrat, who led the Congressional Progressive Caucus  until this year, said Khalil’s detainment marked the start of a “chilling war” on free speech rights in the United States.

Casar added “the administration targeting people for detention based on their political views should send a chill down the spine of every single American.”

“This administration’s plans will not end with Mr. Khalil — they will target activists who speak out about the plundering of taxpayer dollars by billionaires,” said the Texas Democrat, who chairs the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

“They will target those whistleblowers who speak out about the incompetence that we see within this administration,” he said.

Meanwhile, the American Association of University Professors, its chapters at Harvard University, Rutgers University and New York University, along with the Middle East Studies Association, filed suit against the Trump administration on Tuesday to block them “from carrying out large-scale arrests, detentions, and deportations of noncitizen students and faculty members who participate in pro-Palestinian protests and other protected First Amendment activities.”

Billionaire Elon Musk arrives for a meeting with Senate Republicans at the U.S. Capitol on March 5, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Education, Office of Personnel Management and Treasury Department were temporarily barred by a federal judge on Monday from disclosing the “personally identifiable information” of a lawsuit’s plaintiffs and organization members to Elon Musk’s U.S. DOGE Service.

U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman, who issued the preliminary injunction, wrote in her opinion that “no matter how important or urgent the President’s DOGE agenda may be, federal agencies must execute it in accordance with the law” and “that likely did not happen in this case.”

The Maryland federal judge had earlier issued a temporary restraining order in the case, though she declined to include the Treasury Department in that due to a federal judge in New York granting a preliminary injunction that blocked DOGE from accessing that department’s payment systems.

DOGE access

The American Federation of Teachers, as well as a group of labor unions, membership organizations and several U.S. military veterans, filed a lawsuit in February over allegations that the three government entities gave the Department of Government Efficiency access to systems with sensitive and private data, in violation of the Privacy Act.

According to the Justice Department, the 1974 law “establishes a code of fair information practices that governs the collection, maintenance, use, and dissemination of information about individuals that is maintained in systems of records by federal agencies.” 

The Department of Government Efficiency — which is not an actual department — has sought to drastically reduce federal government spending and go after what its staffers see as waste.

“The plaintiffs have shown that Education, OPM, and Treasury likely violated the APA by granting DOGE affiliates sweeping access to their sensitive personal information in defiance of the Privacy Act,” Boardman wrote in her opinion.

She asked both parties to submit a joint status report by close of business on March 31 after meeting to discuss “whether the government intends to file a notice of appeal or whether the Court should enter a scheduling order.”

‘Running roughshod’

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, said “Musk’s operatives have been running roughshod over Americans’ privacy, and today the court correctly decided to uphold the firewall between their activities and the personal data of tens of millions of people” in a Monday statement.

Weingarten, who leads one of the country’s largest teachers unions, added that “Musk and DOGE must be held to account, and this preliminary injunction is a significant and important step forward.”

Meanwhile, the Education Department continues to see drastic changes.

Last week, President Donald Trump directed Education Secretary Linda McMahon to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure” of the department to the maximum extent that is legally permissible.

The agency also announced that it would be cutting more than 1,300 employees through a “reduction in force” process.

“Waste, fraud, and abuse have been deeply entrenched in our broken system for far too long. It takes direct access to the system to identify and fix it,” Harrison Fields, White House principal deputy press secretary, said in a statement to States Newsroom.

“DOGE will continue to shine a light on the fraud they uncover as the American people deserve to know what their government has been spending their hard earned tax dollars on,” Fields said. 

From left, Olivia Sawyer and Jeremy Bauer-Wolf protest the U.S. Education Department’s mass layoffs during a "honk-a-thon" and rally March 14, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — Two separate coalitions of advocacy and labor groups each filed suit against the Trump administration Monday over its sweeping efforts to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education.

The National Education Association, NAACP, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Maryland Council 3 and public school parents filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland to “immediately halt” the administration’s attempts to shutter the agency.

Meanwhile, the American Federation of Teachers, its Massachusetts chapter, AFSCME Council 93, the American Association of University Professors, the Service Employees International Union and two school districts in Massachusetts sued the administration in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts on Monday over the executive order and recent mass layoffs at the department.

NEA’s complaint argues that “if allowed to stand,” the Trump administration’s actions will “irrevocably harm” the groups, “their members and PK-12 and postsecondary education across the United States.”

The union notes that the administration “has taken drastic, escalating steps to incapacitate the Department, including cancelation of $1.5 billion in grants and contracts for the performance of core functions and mass layoffs of half its workforce.”

It adds that “these actions are unconstitutional and violate Congress’s directives in creating the Department and assigning it specific duties and appropriations,” per the complaint.

AFT’s complaint points out that “the mass removal of the individuals who do the work of the Department means that the Department will be unable to perform its statutorily mandated duties, including effectively distributing funds for students with disabilities and providing support and technical assistance to parents, families, and states to ensure those services are provided most effectively; protecting students’ civil rights; and providing financial aid for students seeking higher education.” 

AFT argues that the executive order and the department’s “final mission,” including the mass layoffs, “are unlawful and harm millions of students, school districts, and educators across the nation.”

Trump actions

President Donald Trump last week directed Education Secretary Linda McMahon to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure” of the department to the maximum extent that is legally permissible.

Only Congress, which established the 45-year-old department, has the power to abolish it.

The following day, Trump announced that some of the department’s key responsibilities — including its handling of the massive student loan portfolio and special education services — would be housed in the Small Business Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services, respectively.

The president also said HHS would handle “nutrition programs,” though it was unclear what he was referring to as the Department of Agriculture manages school meal and other major nutrition programs.

NEA slams ‘gutting’ of department

In a Monday statement, NEA’s president Becky Pringle said “gutting the Department of Education will hurt all students by sending class sizes soaring, cutting job training programs, making higher education more out of reach, taking away special education services for students with disabilities, and gutting student civil rights protections.”

“Parents, educators, and community leaders know this will widen the gaps in education, which is why we will do everything in our power to protect our students and their futures,” Pringle said.

Prior to the executive order, the agency already saw significant changes in the weeks since Trump took office, including mass layoffs, contract cuts, staff buyouts and major policy changes.

The department also announced earlier this month that more than 1,300 employees would be cut through a “reduction in force” process, calling into question how those mass layoffs would affect the agency’s abilities to carry out its main responsibilities.

The cuts prompted a lawsuit from a coalition of 21 Democratic attorneys general — who are trying to block the department from implementing the “reduction in force” action and Trump’s “directive to dismantle the Department of Education.”

White House, ED reaction

“The NEA and NAACP have done nothing to advance the educational outcomes of America’s students and the latest NAEP scores prove that,” Harrison Fields, White House principal deputy press secretary, said in a statement shared with States Newsroom. 

The latest data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress found that average math and reading scores in 2024 for pupils in fourth grade and eighth grade were lower compared to before the coronavirus pandemic, in 2019.

“Instead of playing politics with baseless lawsuits, these groups should ditch the courtroom and work with the Trump administration and states on improving the classroom,” Fields said.

“As President Trump and Secretary McMahon have made clear, sunsetting the Department of Education will be done in partnership with Congress and national and state leaders to ensure all statutorily required programs are managed responsibly and where they best serve students and families,” Madi Biedermann, a spokesperson for the Education Department, said in a statement to States Newsroom.

“The U.S. Department of Education continues to deliver on all programs that fall under the agency’s purview, including vigilantly enforcing federal civil rights laws in schools and ensuring students with special needs and disabilities have access to critical resources,” Biedermann added. 

President Donald Trump announces a proposed shift of Education Department programs to the Small Business Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services during a press availability in the Oval Office on March 21, 2025. (Source: White House livestream) 

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump said Friday that the U.S. Small Business Administration would handle the student loan portfolio for the slated-for-elimination Education Department, and that the Department of Health and Human Services would handle special education services and nutrition programs.

The announcement — which raises myriad questions over the logistics to carry out these transfers of authority — came a day after Trump signed a sweeping executive order that directs Education Secretary Linda McMahon to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure” of the department to the extent she is permitted to by law.

“I do want to say that I’ve decided that the SBA, the Small Business Administration, headed by Kelly Loeffler — terrific person — will handle all of the student loan portfolio,” Trump said Friday morning.

The White House did not provide advance notice of the announcement, which Trump made at the opening of an Oval Office appearance with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

The Education Department manages student loans for millions of Americans, with a portfolio of more than $1.6 trillion, according to the White House.

In his executive order, Trump said the federal student aid program is “roughly the size of one of the Nation’s largest banks, Wells Fargo,” adding that “although Wells Fargo has more than 200,000 employees, the Department of Education has fewer than 1,500 in its Office of Federal Student Aid.”

‘Everything else’ to HHS

Meanwhile, Trump also said that the Department of Health and Human Services “will be handling special needs and all of the nutrition programs and everything else.”

It is unclear what nutrition programs Trump was referencing, as the U.S. Department of Agriculture manages school meal and other major nutrition programs.

One of the Education Department’s core functions includes supporting students with special needs. The department is also tasked with carrying out the federal guarantee of a free public education for children with disabilities Congress approved in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA.

Trump added that the transfers will “work out very well.”

“Those two elements will be taken out of the Department of Education,” he said Friday. “And then all we have to do is get the students to get guidance from the people that love them and cherish them, including their parents, by the way, who will be totally involved in their education, along with the boards and the governors and the states.”

Trump’s Thursday order also directs McMahon to “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.”

SBA, HHS heads welcome extra programs

Asked for clarification on the announcement, a White House spokesperson on Friday referred States Newsroom to comments from White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt and heads of the Small Business Administration and Health and Human Services Department.

Leavitt noted the move was consistent with Trump’s promise to return education policy decisions to states.

“President Trump is doing everything within his executive authority to dismantle the Department of Education and return education back to the states while safeguarding critical functions for students and families such as student loans, special needs programs, and nutrition programs,” Leavitt said. “The President has always said Congress has a role to play in this effort, and we expect them to help the President deliver.”

Loeffler and HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said their agencies were prepared to take on the Education Department programs.

“As the government’s largest guarantor of business loans, the SBA stands ready to deploy its resources and expertise on behalf of America’s taxpayers and students,” Loeffler said.

Kennedy, on the social media platform X, said his department was “fully prepared to take on the responsibility of supporting individuals with special needs and overseeing nutrition programs that were run by @usedgov.”

The Education Department directed States Newsroom to McMahon’s remarks on Fox News on Friday, where she said the department was discussing with other federal agencies where its programs may end up, noting she had a “good conversation” with Loeffler and that the two are “going to work on the strategic plan together.” 

U.S. President Donald Trump stands with Secretary of Education Linda McMahon after signing an executive order to reduce the size and scope of the Education Department during a ceremony in the East Room of the White House on March 20, 2025 in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — In a sweeping executive order signed Thursday, President Donald Trump called on Education Secretary Linda McMahon to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure” of the U.S. Education Department.

Trump signed the order at a major White House ceremony, flanked by children seated at desks. It directs McMahon to “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.”

Trump spoke to an audience packed with top GOP state officials, and he cited Republican Govs. Greg Abbott of Texas, Mike Braun of Indiana, Ron DeSantis of Florida, Bill Lee of Tennessee, Kim Reynolds of Iowa, Jeff Landry of Louisiana, Brad Little of Idaho, Jim Pillen of Nebraska and Mike DeWine of Ohio.

Deena Bishop, commissioner of Alaska’s Department of Education and Early Development, was slated to attend, though she was not cited by Trump.

“After 45 years, the United States spends more money in education by far than any other country and spends, likewise, by far, more money per pupil than any country, and it’s not even close, but yet we rank near the bottom of the list in terms of success,” Trump said at the brief ceremony. 

GOP Reps. Tim Walberg of Michigan and Virginia Foxx of North Carolina, the respective current and former chairs of the House Committee on Education and Workforce, were also in attendance. 

The children each signed their own individual executive orders, proudly displaying them alongside Trump. 

The order, which is sure to draw legal challenges, “also directs that programs or activities receiving any remaining Department of Education funds will not advance DEI or gender ideology,” referring to diversity, equity and inclusion.

Widespread reports ahead of the signing drew intense blowback from leading education groups, labor unions and congressional Democrats.

Rep. Bobby Scott, ranking member of the House Committee on Education and Workforce, noted that the department “was founded in part to guarantee the enforcement of students’ civil rights” in a statement Thursday.

“Legality aside, dismantling (the department) will exacerbate existing disparities, reduce accountability, and put low-income students, students of color, students with disabilities, rural students, and English as a Second Language (ESL) students at risk,” the Virginia Democrat added. 

Title I, IDEA funds 

The department’s many responsibilities include administering federal student aid, carrying out civil rights investigations, providing Title I funding for low-income school districts and guaranteeing a free public education for children with disabilities via the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA.

Following the signing, McMahon clarified in a statement that “closing the Department does not mean cutting off funds from those who depend on them — we will continue to support K-12 students, students with special needs, college student borrowers, and others who rely on essential programs.”

“We’re going to follow the law and eliminate the bureaucracy responsibly by working through Congress to ensure a lawful and orderly transition,” McMahon said. 

Trump’s long-held campaign promise to move education “back to the states” comes despite much of the funding and oversight of schools already occurring at the state and local levels. The department also legally cannot dictate the curriculum of schools across the country.

Congress has the sole authority to shut down the department, and any bill to completely close the agency would face extreme difficulties getting through the narrowly GOP-controlled Senate, with at least 60 senators needed to advance past the filibuster.

However, it could be possible for the administration to take significant actions short of closure, such as moving some Education Department functions to other agencies.

The agency has an annual budget of $79 billion in discretionary spending, or funds appropriated yearly by Congress. 

Layoffs, buyouts

The department has already witnessed mass layoffs, contract cuts, staff buyouts and major policy changes in the weeks since Trump took office.

Earlier in March, the department announced that more than 1,300 employees would be cut through a “reduction in force” process — sparking concerns across the country over how the mass layoffs would impact the agency’s abilities to carry out its core functions.

The department had 4,133 employees when Trump took office, but the cuts brought the total number of workers remaining down to roughly 2,183.

A group of 21 Democratic attorneys general quickly sued over that effort and asked a federal court in Massachusetts to block the department from implementing the “reduction in force” action and Trump’s “directive to dismantle the Department of Education.”

Lawsuit incoming

Opponents of the closure said it’s one more example of how Trump and billionaire Elon Musk, head of the temporary U.S. DOGE Service, are seeking to destroy the federal government as they reduce the workforce and spending.

“Donald Trump and Elon Musk have aimed their wrecking ball at public schools and the futures of the 50 million students in rural, suburban, and urban communities across America, by dismantling public education to pay for tax handouts for billionaires,” said Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association, in a Wednesday night statement.

“Now, Trump is at it again with his latest effort to gut the Department of Education programs that support every student across the nation,” added Pringle, who leads the largest labor union in the country.

“If successful, Trump’s continued actions will hurt all students by sending class sizes soaring, cutting job training programs, making higher education more expensive and out of reach for middle class families, taking away special education services for students with disabilities, and gutting student civil rights protections,” she said.

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, one of the largest teachers unions in the country, kept her response to reports of the forthcoming order succinct.

“See you in court,” she said. 

President Donald Trump signed an executive order March 14, 2025, imposing dramatic cuts on seven federal agencies, including the Institute of Museum and Library Services. (Catherine McQueen/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump’s move late Friday to dismantle the agency that serves as the primary federal funding source for libraries and museums nationwide prompted questions over the weekend about how the agency can continue to carry out its core work.

After Trump signed an executive order Friday that called for severe reductions in seven federal agencies, including the Institute of Museum and Library Services that provided $266.7 million in grants and other awards last year, groups representing museums and libraries across the country called on Trump to reconsider the move and asked Congress to intervene on their behalf.

“By eliminating the only federal agency dedicated to funding library services, the Trump administration’s executive order is cutting off at the knees the most beloved and trusted of American institutions and the staff and services they offer,” the American Library Association, the oldest and largest library association in the country, said in a statement over the weekend.

The Friday order, titled “continuing the reduction of the federal bureaucracy,”  called for eliminating “to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law” listed agencies’ functions that aren’t statutorily mandated. It also called for reducing the “performance” of agencies’ mandated functions and “associated personnel” to the legal minimum.

The Institute of Museum and Library Services, which Congress established in 1996, has a mission to “advance, support, and empower America’s museums, libraries, and related organizations through grantmaking, research, and policy development.”

The states that received the highest total awards from the agency in 2024 were California at $26.4 million, New York at nearly $20 million, Texas at $15.7 million, Florida at $11.4 million and Illinois at $11.3 million, according to data from the agency.

The order to downsize the agency is part of Trump and billionaire White House adviser Elon Musk’s U.S. DOGE Service’s initiative to slash federal government spending and go after what they deem unnecessary.

“The American people elected President Trump to drain the swamp and end ineffective government programs that empower government without achieving measurable results,” a White House fact sheet accompanying the order read.

The other agencies affected are the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, the U.S. Agency for Global Media, the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in the Smithsonian Institution, the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness, the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund and the Minority Business Development Agency.

Library, museum organizations react

The American Library Association said the order would decimate services such as early literacy development and reading programs, high-speed internet access, employment assistance, homework and research resources and accessible reading materials.

The organization called on Trump to reconsider his “short-sighted” decision and encouraged lawmakers to “visit the libraries that serve their constituents and urge the White House to spare the modest federal funding for America’s libraries.”

EveryLibrary, an organization dedicated to building support for libraries, said in a Saturday statement the group is “extremely concerned” the wording in Trump’s executive order “could result in cuts to the core functions” of the agency.

The organization said the agency’s “statutory obligations to state libraries include federal funding through the Grants to States program, the National Leadership Grant program, and all current contracts, grants, and awards” and that “this core work cannot be disrupted or dismantled by DOGE.”

In a statement shared with States Newsroom on Monday, the American Alliance of Museums, which includes 35,000 museums and museum professionals, said Trump’s effort “threatens the critical roles museums and museum workers play in American society, and puts jobs, education, conservation, and vital community programs at risk.” 

“Museums are vital community anchors, serving all Americans including youth, seniors, people with disabilities, and veterans,” the statement read. “Museums are not only centers for education and inspiration but also economic engines — creating jobs, driving tourism, and strengthening local economies.”

Neither the Institute of Museum and Library Services nor the White House responded to a request for comment Monday. 

Keri Rodrigues, president of the National Parents Union, speaks at a rally on Friday, March 14, 2025, in Washington, D.C, protesting the U.S. Education Department’s mass layoffs and President Donald Trump’s plans to dismantle the agency. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — Dozens gathered Friday outside the U.S. Department of Education to protest the ousting of more than 1,300 employees and President Donald Trump’s plans to dismantle the agency.

As the fate of the 45-year-old department hangs in the balance following the cuts this week, demonstrators held signs at a rally outside of the Education Department headquarters with slogans including “Educate Don’t Eliminate” and “WWE: We Want Education,” a reference to Education Secretary Linda McMahon’s World Wrestling Entertainment background.

“These cuts — this isn’t just about a department and a building — this is about federal streams of money that help students live (up to) their full potential,” said Kim Anderson, executive director of the National Education Association, the country’s largest labor union.

“This agenda is about cutting funding and shipping it to private schools, it is about vouchers, make no mistake about it,” Anderson said. “It is about dismantling public education so that children cannot get what they deserve.”

Trump has repeatedly pledged to shutter the agency, and McMahon confirmed this week that the sweeping cuts marked the first step in that process.

The president alone does not have the authority to close the department, and such an effort would need congressional approval.

‘Fight back’

Following a “honk-a-thon” on Independence Avenue, Sen. Mazie Hirono told the crowd that Trump and billionaire White House adviser Elon Musk “think that they can take a chain saw to government agencies, and they’ve been slashing and burning and firing thousands of people for no cause, and just recently, of course, they got to the Department of Education.”

Trump and Musk have taken significant steps to reduce federal government spending and go after what they see as waste, with the Education Department marking a major target of those efforts.

“But we are all here to fight back because this is no time to be sitting back thinking that other people are going to fight the battles for us,” the Hawaii Democrat said. “No, we are in it together.”

The rally came as department leaders announced this week that they would be cutting a substantial number of the agency’s staff, prompting concerns over how the department could carry out its responsibilities when roughly halving its workforce.

The layoffs make huge cuts to the Office for Civil Rights, Office of Federal Student Aid and Institute of Education Sciences, among other units, according to the nonprofit Education Reform Now, which advocates for more resources for education.

Fulfilling responsibilities

Some of the department’s many responsibilities include administering federal student aid, enforcing civil rights cases, providing Title I funding for low-income school districts and guaranteeing a free public education for children with disabilities via the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA.

Through a spokesperson, the department said Thursday its core responsibilities would not be impacted by the cuts.

But protesters Friday worried about the path to dismantling the department.

Molly Cronin, a special education teacher in Virginia, told States Newsroom that “if IDEA is not protected, if Title I is not protected, if Head Start is not funded, our most vulnerable children are going to be failed by the system, and we have a duty as educators to protect all students.”

Cronin, a member of the National Education Association who serves on the board of her local union, said one of the biggest misunderstandings about the agency “is that people think that the federal department is in control of the states and states’ curriculum and programs and all of that, when, in fact, that’s not true.”

Trump has vowed to shut down the department in his quest to move education “back to the states,” despite much of the funding and oversight of schools already occurring at the state and local levels. Legally, the federal government cannot control the curriculum of schools.

Legal challenges to the sweeping cuts are already taking shape, after 21 Democratic attorneys general sued the Trump administration Thursday over the efforts.

Prior to the mass layoffs, the department already witnessed dramatic downsizing in the weeks since Trump took office, with major contract cuts and staff buyouts.

Cuts make mission harder

Antoinette Flores, who worked for the Education Department during the Biden administration, said she knows many of the people harmed by the layoffs. 

“These are colleagues, these are friends, these are dedicated public servants that help students, and it’s devastating to see what’s happening.”

Flores, who focuses on higher education, told States Newsroom the massive cuts are “going to make it much more challenging for students to receive grants and loans that they’re entitled to.”

Rather than go after inefficiencies in the federal government, as Trump and Musk have said is their goal, Flores said a smaller federal workforce would actually “increase fraud, waste and abuse.” 

The Lyndon Baines Johnson Department of Education Building pictured on Nov. 25, 2024. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — A group of 21 Democratic attorneys general sued the Trump administration Thursday over the U.S. Education Department’s efforts this week to cut more than 1,300 employees.

The complaint asks the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts to block the department from implementing the “reduction in force,” or RIF, action and President Donald Trump’s “directive to dismantle the Department of Education.”

Attorneys general in Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington state and Wisconsin signed onto the suit.

The group said the RIF is “equivalent to incapacitating key, statutorily-mandated functions of the Department, causing immense damage” to their states and educational systems.

Leaders at the 45-year-old agency said Tuesday they would be cutting a substantial number of the agency’s staff, prompting concerns over how the department could carry out its responsibilities when roughly halving its workforce.

The attorneys general argued that the “massive RIF is not supported by any actual reasoning or specific determinations about how to eliminate purported waste in the Department — rather, the RIF is part and parcel of President Trump’s and Secretary (Linda) McMahon’s opposition to the Department of Education’s entire existence.”

Democratic Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes told reporters in Phoenix Thursday morning that the Department of Education cuts would be devastating to Arizona’s public school students, but especially to those who live in rural areas and who have learning disabilities.

“This is part of a deliberate effort to dismantle public education in this country,” Mayes said. “It is going to hurt students, families and schools, especially in rural areas that rely on federal support. And let us be clear, there is absolutely no way that the Department of Education can perform its legal obligations with half the workforce.” 

Madi Biedermann, a spokesperson for the department, said in a written statement to States Newsroom that the agency’s RIF “was implemented carefully and in compliance with all applicable regulations and laws,” and “they are strategic, internal-facing cuts that will not directly impact students and families.”

Some of the department’s core functions include administering federal student aid, enforcing civil rights cases, providing Title I funding for low-income school districts and guaranteeing a free public education for children with disabilities via the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA.

Biedermann said the cuts would not impact employees working on the student aid application, student loan servicing and Elementary and Secondary Education Act, or ESEA, Title funds. No workers in the Office of Special Education Programs or the Rehabilitation Services Administration who serve children with disabilities were impacted, she wrote.

She said the department’s Office for Civil Rights “will continue to investigate complaints and vigorously enforce federal civil rights laws.”

But according to an analysis by the nonprofit Education Reform Now, which advocates for more resources for education, based on data from the union representing Education Department workers, the layoffs make huge cuts to the Office for Civil Rights, Office of Federal Student Aid and Institute of Education Sciences, among other units.

Closing the department

Shortly after the announcement of the layoffs, McMahon confirmed to Fox News that the cuts were the first step on the road to shutting down the department.

McMahon said Trump’s “directive to me, clearly, is to shut down the Department of Education” and saw the layoffs as the first step toward eliminating what she sees as “bureaucratic bloat.”

Trump campaigned on a promise to shutter the agency in his quest to move education “back to the states” — despite much of the funding and oversight already occurring at the state and local levels.

The department has also been a major target of Trump and billionaire White House adviser Elon Musk’s efforts to slash federal government spending and eliminate what they see as waste. 

Arizona Mirror reporter Caitlin Sievers contributed to this report. 

Billionaire Elon Musk, a senior adviser to President Donald Trump, arrives for a meeting with Senate Republicans at the U.S. Capitol on March 5, 2025. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — With thousands of federal workers already laid off, President Donald Trump said Thursday that he wants his Cabinet members to “keep good people” and does not want to “see a big cut where a lot of good people are cut.”

Trump, in meeting with his Cabinet members and other officials earlier in the day, also informed them that billionaire Elon Musk could guide departments on what to do but would not make staffing or policy decisions for the agencies, according to reporting by POLITICO.

Trump and Musk’s U.S. DOGE Service have taken on massive efforts to try to reduce federal government spending — leading to dizzying cuts across wide swaths of the federal workforce.

Those mass firings have prompted a slew of lawsuits filed in federal court and questions about the extent of Musk’s authority within the executive branch.

The president, speaking to reporters Thursday afternoon, said the Cabinet meeting focused on those massive reductions within the federal government.

Asked what Trump told Cabinet members Thursday regarding Musk and his authority to carry out actions, the president said they had “a great meeting” and clarified that “the people that aren’t doing a good job, that are unreliable, don’t show up to work, etcetera — those people can be cut.”

Musk’s role 

Musk also, according to POLITICO, has reportedly admitted that DOGE has made some mistakes.

Trump, who told the press several times Thursday that he wants the Cabinet members to “keep good people,” said “we’re going to be watching them, and Elon and the group are going to be watching them, and if they can cut, it’s better, and if they don’t cut, then Elon will do the cutting.”

The president also said he thinks Musk and the DOGE service have done “an amazing job.”

DOGE stands for Department of Government Efficiency, although the entity is not a Cabinet department and is temporary under a Trump executive order.

“We want to get rid of the people that aren’t working, that aren’t showing up and have a lot of problems, and so they’re working together with Elon, and I think we’re doing a really great job. We’re cutting it down. We have to, for the sake of our country,” Trump said.