A federal judge in Boston has blocked the Trump administration from attempting to dismantle the Department of Education.
U.S. District Judge Myong Joun issued a preliminary injunction Thursday that bars the Trump administration from firing half the Department of Education’s workforce.
The decision marks the first time a federal judge has determined the Trump administration’s sweeping changes to the Department of Education are unlawful.
The changes imposed by Trump and Education Secretary Linda McMahon, Judge Joun wrote, “effectively impossible for the Department to carry out its statutorily mandated functions.”
Rather, the record is replete with evidence of the opposite,” the judge wrote, referring to the “reduction in force” firings.
The Trump administration’s attempt to dismantle the Department of Education has been thwarted by a federal judge in Boston.
U. S. A preliminary injunction prohibiting the Trump administration from terminating half of the Department of Education’s employees was issued by District Judge Myong Joun on Thursday.
The Biden-appointed Judge Joun’s order also forbids the Department of Education from giving the Small Business Administration control over federal student loan administration.
This is the first time a federal judge has ruled that the extensive reforms made to the Department of Education by the Trump administration are illegal.
The order temporarily halts the Trump administration’s efforts to transfer federal student loan obligations, fire over 2,000 Department of Education employees, and carry out the president’s executive order from March 20 to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education.”. “.”.
Madi Biedermann, deputy assistant secretary for communications at the Department of Education, referred to Joun as a far-left judge who “overstepped” his authority and stated that the agency’s reduction-in-force was legal.
“It is evident that President Trump and the Senate-confirmed Secretary of Education, rather than an unelected judge with a political grudge, have the power to decide on agency reorganization initiatives,” Biedermann wrote in a statement to ABC News. The interests of American families and students are not served by this decision. On an urgent basis, we will contest this right away. “”.
Trump’s attempts to shrink the Department of Education last month were contested by a group comprising a number of state attorneys general, educational institutions, and nonprofit organizations, who argued the president cannot shut down a federal agency established by Congress on his own.
Trump administration attorneys contended that the department’s reduction efforts would increase its efficiency and were distinct from Trump’s promise to abolish it.
Judge Joun didn’t believe it. In contrast to Trump’s promise to abolish the Department of Education entirely, his decision provided a scathing critique of the administration’s assertion that recent reforms to the Department are intended to increase efficiency.
He wrote, “It is obviously untrue to say that the defendants’ actions are just a’reorganization’.”.
Judge Joun stated that the Department’s ability to fulfill its statutory duties was “effectively impossible” due to the modifications imposed by Trump and Education Secretary Linda McMahon. “..”.
The president does not have the authority to completely dismantle entire federal departments, Trump wrote, even though he has the authority to fire executive officers. He also questioned the assertion that his executive actions and the legislative attempt to dismantle the Department of Education were distinct.
Furthermore, there is no proof that the RIF has improved the Department’s efficiency, nor is there any indication that the defendants are attempting to achieve a “legislative goal” or otherwise collaborating with Congress to find a solution. Instead, the judge wrote, “the record is full of evidence of the opposite,” alluding to the “reduction in force” firings.
“Defendants have not provided any evidence to the contrary, and consolidated plaintiffs have shown that the Department will not be able to carry out its statutory functions — and in some cases, is already unable to do so,” he wrote.
According to Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, which represented a number of the plaintiffs, “Today’s order means that the Trump administration’s disastrous mass firings of career civil servants are blocked while this wildly disruptive and unlawful agency action is litigated.”. This administration ought to concentrate on ways to enhance education and opportunities for everyone, rather than destroying our country’s best values and our hope for a brighter future. “..”.
Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, praised the decision, saying, “Today, the court rightly rejected one of the administration’s very first illegal, and consequential, acts: abolishing the federal role in education.”. Since the education department guarantees that all children, not just a select few, have an opportunity at a better life, the great majority of Americans and states with the highest NAEP scores, like Massachusetts, want to keep it in place. “..”.
The injunction comes as Education Secretary Linda McMahon, at the department’s fiscal year 2026 budget hearing on Capitol Hill, resumed calls to reduce the department’s size. McMahon stressed that her “last mission” to dismantle the agency must be carried out in a “lawful fashion” and defended President Trump’s $12 billion cut to the department in his slim budget proposal. “”.
According to ABC News, some former employees of the Department of Education are happy about the injunction.
As the appeals process progresses, Kishia Kegler, one of the hundreds of dismissed civil servants whose official separation begins in June, told ABC News she is determined to return.
In a statement, Kegler stated that “the Department of Education’s services are essential to students and families.”. It has been violated ever since the illegal takeover and dismantling started. This work remains a priority for me. “”.
