As the academic year began, no one anticipated that the federal agency vital to American education would soon fall silent. Yet, with the government shutdown now in its third week, the U.S. Department of Education operates with a bare-bones staff, its usual functions paused, and its influence diminishing.
Education Secretary Linda McMahon, however, views this inactivity not as a problem, but as a practical demonstration of her vision for the future. She asserted in a recent social media update that, even after two weeks, ‘millions of American students are still going to school, teachers are getting paid, and schools are operating as normal.’ This statement, while intended to reassure, also served as a clear challenge to the necessity of federal oversight.
Beneath this calm facade, the intricate system of American public education is showing signs of strain. No new grants are being issued, and critical civil rights investigations have been halted. Essential offices that guide schools and states on federal laws—covering everything from disability services to English language learning—are now unresponsive. Critics argue that this shutdown has turned educational institutions into unintentional testing grounds for instability.
The Gradual Unraveling of Support
While a significant portion of federal education funding, including billions released in October, is currently safeguarding schools until July, programs reliant on continuous, smaller disbursements are in precarious positions. Crucial initiatives like Head Start preschools and school meal reimbursements are facing imminent funding shortfalls.
Julia Martin, a policy and government affairs director at the Bruman Group, an education law firm, expressed concerns that ‘districts are really worried that they’re going to have to dig deep into their pockets to fund meals.’ She highlighted that the U.S. Department of Agriculture, responsible for school lunch program reimbursements, has only a two-month supply of funds remaining.
Additionally, the final portions of federal COVID-19 relief aid are being disbursed slowly, hampered by insufficient staff to process reimbursement applications.
The effects of this situation are not uniformly distributed but are profoundly symbolic. American schools primarily receive funding from state and local taxes, yet federal aid is critical for their most vulnerable student populations: those in poverty, those with disabilities, and those who depend on school meals for sustenance. The present funding freeze disproportionately impacts these groups.
The Absence of Federal Guidance
Beyond financial concerns, the lack of federal direction is a major issue. The shutdown has halted the Department of Education’s ‘technical assistance,’ a vital support system that states and districts rely on to understand and implement federal education laws.
Katy Neas, CEO of The Arc of the United States, a prominent disability rights organization, highlighted the problem, stating that ‘people of good intention and good faith are going to have honest questions that they’re not going to be able to get an answer for.’ Neas, a former head of the department’s special education office, cautioned that without federal assistance, ‘more states are likely to break federal laws unknowingly.’
Key offices have been severely impacted, including the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, which previously offered crucial support to families of students with disabilities, and the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, responsible for ensuring adherence to academic standards.
In search of answers, some states have consulted private law firms, but in an environment lacking federal oversight, clear guidance is hard to find. Martin noted that many districts are simply adhering to ‘old guidance because it’s the best thing they have,’ citing a 2015 directive for English language learners that was withdrawn shortly before the shutdown.
A Vision for Minimal Government
This situation aligns with President Donald Trump’s long-held ideological stance. From his initial campaign, Trump has consistently argued for shifting education control back to individual states, portraying the federal role as excessive and dispensable.
In this context, the shutdown serves as a practical demonstration of this concept. With schools largely continuing operations and teachers performing their duties, Secretary McMahon has used the opportunity to reinforce her belief that a reduced federal presence in education is not only viable but also overdue.
Even prior to the current shutdown, the Education Department had seen significant downsizing. Its workforce dwindled from 4,100 employees when Trump took office to approximately 2,400. With most staff now furloughed, only 330 remain active.
The gradual dismantling of the department is already evident. This past summer, programs for adult and career education, including Perkins grants for technical training, were moved to the Department of Labor. Furthermore, there are active plans to transfer the enormous $1.6 trillion federal student loan portfolio to the Treasury Department, a move greenlit by a recent Supreme Court decision.
Secretary McMahon has also proposed relocating special education services to the Department of Health and Human Services, and civil rights enforcement to the Justice Department. This extensive reshuffling could fundamentally and permanently alter the governance structure of American education.
The Enduring Implications
Many observers believe the true danger isn’t the immediate consequences, but rather the precedent this shutdown sets. Each day that federal guidance and oversight are absent inadvertently bolsters the argument for a reduced, or even eliminated, Department of Education.
The irony is striking: the more successfully schools continue to operate without federal intervention, the more credible McMahon’s assertion that her department is unnecessary becomes.
However, this narrative obscures a harsher reality. The absence of a regulatory body doesn’t ensure fairness; instead, it allows rules to become ambiguous, with the most vulnerable students—the impoverished, the disabled, and the very young—being the first to suffer the consequences.