On May 22, 2025, U.S. District Judge Myong Joun issued a preliminary injunction blocking President Donald Trump's executive order to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education and reinstating the 1,300 employees who were laid off in March. The ruling came in response to lawsuits filed by Democratic-led states, school districts, and teachers' unions, which argued that the administration lacked the legislative authority to restructure the department and that such actions would impede its ability to fulfill legal mandates, including managing student loans and enforcing civil rights in education.

In March 2025, President Trump signed an executive order directing the closure of the Department of Education, aiming to transfer educational authority to states and local communities. This move included laying off approximately 1,300 employees, nearly half of the department's workforce. The administration justified these actions as efforts to reduce bureaucratic inefficiencies and fulfill a campaign promise to eliminate the department.

The executive order faced immediate legal challenges from a coalition of 21 Democratic attorneys general, school districts, and teachers' unions. They argued that the administration lacked the authority to unilaterally dismantle a federal agency established by Congress and that such actions would hinder the department's ability to fulfill its legal obligations, including managing student loans and enforcing civil rights laws.

Judge Joun's ruling emphasized that the layoffs would likely "cripple" the department, rejecting the administration's claim that the move was merely a reorganization. He stated that the executive order exceeded the constitutional authority of the executive branch and violated the Administrative Procedure Act.

The Trump administration has appealed Judge Joun's decision, asserting that the reorganization aims to improve efficiency and reduce bureaucratic overhead. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon, appointed in March 2025, has been a proponent of closing the department, aligning with the administration's goal to return educational control to states.

The attempted dismantling of the Department of Education and the subsequent court ruling have significant implications:

• Impact on Students and Educators: The layoffs and potential closure of the department threaten support for students with disabilities, enforcement of civil rights in education, and management of federal student aid programs.

• Federal vs. State Control: The administration's efforts reflect a broader ideological push to shift control of education from the federal government to states and local entities, raising debates about the effectiveness and equity of such a transition.

• Legal Precedents: The case underscores the limits of executive power in restructuring federal agencies without congressional approval, potentially setting a precedent for future administrative actions.

The court's decision to block the Trump administration's attempt to dismantle the Department of Education highlights the ongoing tension between federal authority and state control in education policy. As the administration appeals the ruling, the future of the department and its role in American education remains uncertain.