Efforts by the Trump administration to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education have been met with significant opposition from House Democrats. These efforts include shifting core responsibilities to other government agencies, raising concerns among lawmakers and education advocates.
Representative Bobby Scott of Virginia, a key voice against the administration’s strategy, emphasized that the administration has repeatedly bypassed the law to undermine public education without congressional or public approval. Scott, the leading Democrat on the House Committee on Education and Workforce, convened a forum with education advocates and legal experts to address these actions.
The controversy centers around six interagency agreements (IAAs) introduced in November 2025, which reallocate several duties of the Education Department to four other departments. Critics argue that these agreements disrupt the department’s ability to function effectively.
Challenges to Agency Transfers
Ashley Harrington, a senior policy counsel at the Legal Defense Fund, criticized the IAAs, highlighting the inadequate preparedness of the receiving agencies to manage the Education Department’s extensive programs. Harrington, formerly a senior adviser at the department, pointed out the lack of institutional knowledge in these other agencies.
Rachel Homer, Director of Democracy 2025 and senior attorney at Democracy Forward, stressed that Congress has the power to create and define agency functions, and the executive branch is obligated to implement these laws. Homer noted, “Congress charges those agencies with performing certain functions, Congress determines the mission of those agencies, and the executive branch’s obligation is to carry that out, is to implement those laws faithfully.”
The advocacy group Democracy Forward is involved in legal actions opposing the administration’s restructuring efforts, which have been consolidated with lawsuits from Democratic attorneys general to challenge the Education Department’s dismantling.
Restructuring and Layoffs
The administration’s plan includes significant downsizing and mass layoffs, initiated in March 2025, with the Supreme Court temporarily allowing these actions in July. President Trump aims to eliminate the department, transferring education responsibilities back to state control, although many functions are already state-managed.
Representative Suzanne Bonamici of Oregon expressed her disbelief over the need to defend the Department of Education’s existence, stating, “As Education committee members, we came here to work on improving education and opening doors of opportunity and addressing the civil rights disparities, but here we are having to defend the actual existence of the Department of Education.”
Impact on Civil Rights
The Office for Civil Rights (OCR), which handles discrimination complaints in schools, has been significantly impacted by these changes. In March, OCR employees faced layoffs and administrative leave as legal challenges developed. Although the department reversed the Reduction in Force (RIF) decision in January, a Government Accountability Office report indicated that $28.5 to $38 million were spent on OCR employees’ salaries and benefits during their leave.
The report also highlighted that most resolved complaints between March and September were dismissed by the department. Ray Li, a policy counsel at the Legal Defense Fund, urged Congress to ensure the OCR remains within a functioning Education Department and not be transferred to the Department of Justice or another agency. Li called for adequate funding and transparency to uphold civil rights protections for students.
The Education Department has not yet responded to requests for comment on these developments.
