SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
us department of education
Sotomayor: Supreme Court Expedites Trump 'Lawlessness' With Education Department Decision
"That decision is indefensible," the justice wrote. "It hands the executive the power to repeal statutes by firing all those necessary to carry them out."
Jul 14, 2025
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor on Monday delivered a blistering dissent to an emergency decision that enables President Donald Trump to plow ahead with laying off nearly 1,400 employees at the Department of Education while a case challenging the plan plays out.
"This case arises out of the president's unilateral efforts to eliminate a Cabinet-level agency established by Congress nearly half a century ago," wrote Sotomayor, joined by her liberals, Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. "As Congress mandated, the department plays a vital role in this nation's education system, safeguarding equal access to learning and channeling billions of dollars to schools and students across the country each year."
"Only Congress has the power to abolish the department," she continued, calling out Trump's executive order and Education Secretary Linda McMahon's subsequent move to fire half the agency's workforce. "When the executive publicly announces its intent to break the law, and then executes on that promise, it is the judiciary's duty to check that lawlessness, not expedite it."
Sotomayor explained that "two lower courts rose to the occasion, preliminarily enjoining the mass firings while the litigation remains ongoing. Rather than maintain the status quo, however, this court now intervenes, lifting the injunction and permitting the government to proceed with dismantling the department."
"That decision is indefensible," she argued. "It hands the executive the power to repeal statutes by firing all those necessary to carry them out. The majority is either willfully blind to the implications of its ruling or naive, but either way the threat to our Constitution's separation of powers is grave. Unable to join in this misuse of our emergency docket, I respectfully dissent."
If a Democratic president declared his intention to unilaterally shut down the Department of Homeland Security, then attempted to transfer or shutter its key offices and decimate its workforce, does anyone seriously think this Supreme Court would let him?
[image or embed]
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjsdc.bsky.social) July 14, 2025 at 3:51 PM
The high court's right-wing majority—which includes three Trump appointees—did not write an opinion, as is customary for shadow docket decisions. The administration responded by pledging to proceed with its efforts to eviscerate the department.
"It is a shame that the highest court in the land had to step in to allow President Trump to advance the reforms Americans elected him to deliver using the authorities granted to him by the U.S. Constitution," McMahon said in a statement. "We will carry out the reduction in force to promote efficiency and accountability and to ensure resources are directed where they matter most – to students, parents, and teachers."
Supreme Court says the president can’t abolish student debt, but he CAN abolish the Department of Education.This isn’t hypocrisy. It’s end times fascism—a fatalistic politics willing torch the government and incinerate the future to maintain hierarchy and subvert democracy.
— Astra Taylor (@astra.bsky.social) July 14, 2025 at 4:32 PM
McMahon and Trump's mass firing effort—part of a broader effort to shutter the department—had been blocked by a U.S. district court in Massachusetts and the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals in response to a lawsuit in which Democracy Forward is representing a coalition that includes the American Federation of Teachers and Service Employees International Union.
"We are incredibly disappointed by the Supreme Court's decision to allow the Trump-Vance administration to proceed with its harmful efforts to dismantle the Department of Education while our case moves forward," the coalition said in a Monday statement. "This unlawful plan will immediately and irreparably harm students, educators, and communities across our nation."
"Children will be among those hurt the most by this decision," the coalition stressed. "We will never stop fighting on behalf of all students and public schools and the protections, services, and resources they need to thrive."
The Associated Press reported that "separately on Monday, more than 20 states sued the administration over billions of dollars in frozen education funding for after-school care, summer programs, and more."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Warren Leads Call for Education Department Watchdog to Probe DOGE 'Infiltration'
"We are concerned that ED undermined its own mission to 'protecting student privacy' in its collaboration and arrangements with DOGE."
Jun 09, 2025
U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Monday urged the Department of Education's Office of Inspector General to investigate an "infiltration" by President Donald Trump's government-gutting entity that, until recently, was spearheaded by billionaire Elon Musk.
In February, the Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) "initiated a 'takeover' of the Education Department," Warren (D-Mass.) and nine other senators wrote to René L. Rocque, the ED's acting inspector general. "Soon afterwards, we opened an investigation into the matter."
"Throughout the course of this investigation, ED revealed a limited set of new information about the extent of DOGE's access
to ED's internal databases, but refused to disclose whether and to what extent DOGE had access to student loan borrowers' data, specifically," the letter details.
"Because of the department's refusal to provide full and complete information, the full extent of DOGE's role and influence at ED remains unknown," the letter continues. "This lack of clarity is not only frustrating for borrowers but also dangerous for the future of an agency that handles an extensive student loan portfolio and a range of federal aid programs for higher education."
"Because of the department's refusal to provide full and complete information, the full extent of DOGE's role and influence at ED remains unknown."
The senators wrote that "we are concerned that ED undermined its own mission to 'protecting student privacy' in its collaboration and arrangements with DOGE," and urged Rocque to "conduct a review as to whether ED adhered to the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a, and 'all applicable laws and regulations concerning management of borrower data' and institutional data when it allowed DOGE access to its databases."
In addition to Warren, the letter is signed by Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).
The letter was first reported by ABC News. While the ED didn't respond to the outlet's request for comment, Harrison Fields, special assistant to the president and principal deputy press secretary, said that "the president's success through DOGE is undisputed and legal, and this work will continue to yield historic results."
Warren—who is set to meet with Trump Education Secretary Linda McMahon on Tuesday—struck a much different tone.
"The department is refusing to tell Americans who's digging through their personal data and if their data is safe," Warren told ABC. "I'm pushing for an independent investigation into what the Department of Education is hiding from us."
The letter comes amid a public feud between Musk and Trump—who ultimately aims to disband the Education Department—and after the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday sided with the administration in a legal battle over DOGE access to Social Security Administration data.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Despite Columbia's Acquiescence, Trump Admin Targets the School's Accreditation
"Trying to pacify Trump and his team will do little to slow their offensive," said one MSNBC political contributor.
Jun 05, 2025
The U.S. Department of Education on Wednesday alleged that Columbia University "is in violation of federal anti-discrimination laws" and so does not meet accreditation standards, the latest sign that the school's efforts to work with the Trump administration have not mollified the White House.
The Wednesday announcement states that following an investigation in Columbia, the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights and the Department of Health and Human Services' Office for Civil Rights in May concluded "that Columbia University acted with deliberate indifference towards the harassment of Jewish students." In doing this, the statement alleges, the school violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving federal funding.
"Columbia is deeply committed to combating antisemitism on our campus," a spokesperson for the school said in a statement sent to multiple outlets on Wednesday. "We take this issue seriously and are continuing to work with the federal government to address it."
According to the statement from the Department of Education, the Trump administration has notified the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, the body that grant's the school's accreditation, that it believes Columbia "fails to meet the standards for accreditation."
"After Hamas' October 7, 2023, terror attack on Israel, Columbia University's leadership acted with deliberate indifference towards the harassment of Jewish students on its campus. This is not only immoral, but also unlawful," said U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon in the department's statement. Particularly during the 2023-24 school year, Columbia was the site of significant pro-Palestinian student activism.
Earlier this year, the Trump administration canceled $400 million in federal grants and contracts to Columbia, citing inaction over alleged antisemitism. According to The Washington Post, the university has remained in talks with federal officials in an effort to recoup that funding.
After the Trump administration announced that the $400 million would be canceled, the university agreed to implement several changes, including to heightened oversight of academic programs focused on the Middle East. Columbia was criticized for doing this.
Since the university made these changes, there have been reports that the Trump administration is interested in placing Columbia under a consent decree, essentially a way for the federal government to exert oversight over the school.
Steve Benen, an MSNBC political contributor and producer for "The Rachel Maddow Show," highlighted Thursday that while the federal government has no formal powers over accreditation and hasn't itself sought to revoke it, the Trump administration's effort to get the school's accreditor to take action against Columbia based on the administration's allegations is "a remarkable step."
"But there's also the larger set of circumstances to consider: Despite the plain fact that Columbia agreed to most of the White House's demands months ago, they're still an administration target," Bennen wrote. "The message, to other schools and other institutions, couldn't be any clearer: Trying to pacify [President Donald] Trump and his team will do little to slow their offensive."
Jon Fansmith, the assistant vice president of government relations at the American Council on Education, echoed this point when speaking with CNN.
"Columbia's efforts to work in good faith with the administration made clear to every college and university the simple fact that this administration isn't interested in addressing antisemitism or working towards good policy," he said. "They want to harm and control schools."
Another school that has been in the administration's crosshairs, Harvard University, was dealt a fresh blow by Trump on Wednesday. The president put out an order imposing a six-month ban on international students entering the U.S. to study at the school.
Harvard has taken a different approach than Columbia, and has fought to defend its autonomy and challenged the administration in court.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular