President Donald Trump has yet to issue the expected executive order (EO) announcing the elimination of the Department of Education (DOE). But many of the more than 80 EOs he has signed since Inauguration Day have an impact on K–12 schools and students, including:

Ending Radical Indoctrination in K – 12 Schooling (signed 1/20/2025) Seeks to eliminate K–12 schools incorporating “DEI” and gender in teaching and learning, as well as support for LGBTQIA+ students.

Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government (1/20/2025) Establishes a federal policy that recognizes only two immutable biologically determined sexes and reverses the prior administration’s position that Title IX protects against discrimination based on gender identity.

Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (1/21/2025) Aims to eliminate DEI programs/initiatives not run by the federal government.

Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports (2/5/2025) Interprets Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 to prohibit transgender girls and women from participating in girls’/women’s sports. It requires agencies to review, and rescind funds for, grant programs that do not comply with the new policy.

Designating English as the Official Language of The United States (3/1/2025) Rescinds previous policy that required agencies and recipients of federal funding to provide extensive language assistance to non-English speakers and work to eliminate discrimination against them.

In addition to these, there have been EOs that aim to end birthright citizenship and also rescinded a policy that kept immigration officials out of sensitive locations such as schools. Both of those orders have had an impact on immigrant families and K-12 communities. But what exactly do these executive orders mean and how much legal authority do they have?

According to education consulting firm EducationCounsel, “EOs have the force of law and can direct agency action, but they cannot themselves expand legal requirements or prohibitions beyond existing statutes or regulations, nor conflict with those existing laws.”

EducationCounsel provides summaries and analysis of each executive order in a document that is updated regularly. Multiple lawsuits have been filed alleging the EOs do, in fact, conflict with existing law. The legal challenges and fluid nature of the situation have created uncertainty, trepidation, and, in some cases, preemptive actions in districts across the country.

The DOE’s Office of Civil Rights also released a “ Dear Colleague” letter to “clarify and reaffirm the nondiscrimination obligations of schools and other entities that receive federal financial assistance from the United States Department of Education.” The letter threatens funding for institutions that make diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts. It, too, has prompted lawsuits.

The latest legal challenge came on March 5 from the National Education Association, the National Education Association–New Hampshire, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of New Hampshire, and the ACLU of Massachusetts, which claim that the DOE is “imposing unfounded and vague legal restrictions that violate due process and the First Amendment; limiting academic freedom; and impermissibly dictating what educators can teach and what students are allowed to learn.”

The American Federation of Teachers, joined by the American Federation of Teachers-Maryland, and the American Sociological Association, had already filed suit against the DOE over the “Dear Colleague” letter. That lawsuit claims that some of the instruction and activities barred by the letter would include “instruction on history and other subjects that recognizes ‘systemic and structural racism,’ and student organizations open to all but based on protected characteristics.”

It’s impossible right now for educators and administrators to know what schools can and cannot do. What actions would run afoul of these EOs? And would there be consequences? Can a school have a club for Black students or LGBTQIA+ students? Can a school hang posters for Black History Month or Women’s History Month? What does naming English as the national language mean for teaching English language learners? What happens while plaintiffs pursue lawsuits challenging the orders as illegal and unconstitutional?

In February, the 161 Department of Defense (DOD) schools educating children of military members were ordered to remove books that dealt with what the administration called “gender ideology” or “discriminatory equity ideology.” The schools were also told they could no longer hold events celebrating Black History Month or other cultural observances, and clubs and extracurricular activities were under review, according to Stars & Stripes.

But public schools do not have to follow the same rules as the DOD schools. Many districts across the country have sent letters to parents reiterating their support for all of their students, emphasizing their commitment to their LGBTQIA+ community. And multiple governors have issued public statements backing their inclusive policies and curriculum. They vow to fight any attempted loss of federal funding or, as Maine Gov. Janet Mills told Trump, “See you in court.”

Obeying in advance
Educators and administrators, however, may be obeying directives in advance unnecessarily as the administration threatens funding. In some places, trans students have been barred from participating in school sports and using bathrooms that align with their gender identity, and books are being removed without challenges or legal resolution, according to reports.

“We call it the chilling effect,” says Katrina Reichert of the Education Law Center. “We’re seeing that schools and districts are preemptively pulling books off the shelf that they think may be considered against some policy that’s out there, maybe against one of these executive orders. They’re doing it out of fear that they’re going to get in trouble.”

Whether school staff act preemptively or not, harm is being done, says Reichert.

“Attacks on public education aren’t new, but there’s definitely been this increase,” says Reichert, a UC Davis public service legal fellow who provides litigation and advocacy support for Education Law Center’s school funding, equity, and student rights work. “It’s a snowballing increase in attacks on very specific groups of students and types of teaching. It’s important to note that as those attacks increase, there’s a proportional increase in harm to students and families. Obviously, that’s the concern. How do we ensure students are protected? How do we ensure families are protected?”

Immigrant students, along with LGBTQIA+ students, girls, and people of color, have been targets of EOs about diversity, equity, and inclusion. Sometimes DEI is listed as DEIA. The A stands for accessibility, which makes disabled students part of the targeted population, too. The EOs have already impacted the education of students with disabilities, with funding stopped without warning, abruptly ending some education and life skills programs, according to news reports.

Reichert finds hope in the strong counterattack to the administration’s actions and advocates stepping up in different ways to support public schools and their students.

“It’s a beacon of light,” she says.

DOGE cuts
The DOE, students, and educators are not just being impacted by the executive orders.

Elon Musk’s department of government efficiency, known as DOGE, is not an official government department (those must be established by Congress). But Trump has given the advisory group the authority to fire federal employees, terminate contracts, and slash funding. Numerous lawsuits question the legality of the DOGE and its actions. In late February, a judge issued an injunction blocking the administration from canceling any more contracts or grants it deems to violate the anti-DEIA executive order. Doing so, the judge said, likely violates the Constitution. Previously another judge had stopped DOGE employees from accessing the personal information of anyone who has applied for or received federal student aid.

But DOGE still made cuts at the Department of Education, for example canceling contracts for the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), according to a report from NPR that quoted a source calling it a “decimation.”

The IES, which includes the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), monitors student achievement, offering data showing what students need to help teachers create plans to meet those needs. The data is crucial for measuring student achievement. Other cuts to the department affected equity assistance centers, programs for students with disabilities, and teacher training grants. The former commissioner of the NCES called the moves “shocking” and “pointless.”

A “final mission”
On March 3, Linda McMahon, the former World Wrestling Entertainment president who spent one year on the Connecticut Board of Education, was confirmed as the new Secretary of Education. She quickly laid out plans for the DOE’s “final mission” in a letter to employees that was posted on the DOE’s website.

“Millions of young Americans are trapped in failing schools, subjected to radical anti-American ideology,” she wrote. “...Our job is to respect the will of the American people and the President they elected, who has tasked us with accomplishing the elimination of bureaucratic bloat here at the Department of Education—a momentous final mission—quickly and responsibly.”

McMahon stated the DOE’s convictions:

1. Parents are the primary decision-makers in their children’s education.
2. Taxpayer-funded education should refocus on meaningful learning in math, reading, science, and history—not “divisive” DEI programs and gender ideology.

“This is our opportunity to perform one final, unforgettable public service to future generations of students,” she wrote. “I hope you will join me in ensuring that when our final mission is complete, we will all be able to say that we left American education freer, stronger, and with more hope for the future.”

Closing the DOE was a repeated promise during Trump’s campaign and is a pillar of the Project 2025 playbook that the administration has been putting into action since taking office. But no federal department can be eliminated without an act of Congress. Closing the DOE requires 60 votes in the Senate, and such a move is not expected to have enough support to pass. There are currently 53 Republican senators. But the administration and McMahon are moving to dismantle the department from within by eliminating staff and funding, and reassigning responsibilities to other agencies. That would render the DOE unable to function as intended.

The goal, members of the administration and Republican Party say, is to allow states, not the federal government, to run their public schools and decide what is taught. But state and local control over public schools already exists. The federal government does not make curricular decisions. The DOE’s main responsibilities are to provide funding (though a large majority comes from states and local municipalities) and ensure federal civil rights protection for students at education agencies, schools, and colleges and universities.

The most vital DOE funding goes to Title I schools and to help districts educate and support students with disabilities. The federal government also manages federal student loans and gives high school students access to financial aid for college through the Free Application for Federal Student Aid.