In March 2025, President Donald J. Trump signed an executive order that would begin the process of dismantling the U.S. Department of Education, declaring that the federal education system had “failed our children, our teachers, and our families.” The order, cloaked in the language of “empowering parents” and “returning control to the states,” marks one of the most significant rollbacks of federal oversight in public education since the civil rights era.
For Black communities, this move is more than a bureaucratic reshuffle. It represents the erasure of a hard-won safeguard in a long and often brutal struggle for equal access to education in America.
From Segregation to Federal Protection: A Brief History
To understand what is at stake, we must first remember why the Department of Education was created in the first place, and what came before it.
For most of American history, education was left to the discretion of the states. In the Jim Crow South, that meant Black children were relegated to underfunded, segregated schools with outdated books, if they had access to formal education at all. Even in the North, redlining and resource inequity meant that Black students were concentrated in under-resourced districts with limited opportunity for advancement.
It was only after Brown v. Board of Education (1954) and subsequent civil rights legislation in the 1960s that the federal government began to play a meaningful role in enforcing equal access to education. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibited discrimination in programs receiving federal assistance. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 created Title I funding to assist schools serving low-income communities—a lifeline for majority-Black schools.
When the Department of Education was formally established in 1979, it institutionalized a federal responsibility to ensure that schools were not only funded, but fair. It meant that a child’s ZIP code or skin color would not determine their future without at least some measure of federal oversight and intervention.
The Present Threat: Who Loses When States Take Over?
With the new executive order, that federal protection is being stripped away. Not with a bang, but with the stroke of a pen.
The Department of Education’s elimination would transfer authority and accountability back to states, many of which have a documented history of resisting equity-driven reforms. In recent years, several state legislatures have already banned the teaching of systemic racism, rolled back DEI programs, and attempted to defund public education under the banner of “parental rights.”
Now, imagine these same states being given full control over education policy and funding without any federal guardrails.
“This is a setup for deepening educational apartheid,” says Dr. Lisa Franklin, an education policy analyst and former advisor to the Congressional Black Caucus. “Without the Department of Education to enforce Title I funding, civil rights protections, or data transparency, Black students—especially in the South—are at risk of being completely abandoned by the system.”
The executive order also includes language restricting federal funds from supporting “programs promoting gender ideology” or “diversity, equity, and inclusion.” These are not arbitrary clauses. They are ideological signals meant to discourage culturally responsive education and silence discussions of race, gender, and history in classrooms.
Higher Education, Student Debt, and the Future of Access
The order also targets the federal student loan system, criticizing it for being too large and too complex for a federal agency to manage. But for Black students, who borrow student loans at higher rates than any other group, federal aid is often the only pathway to higher education.
“Eliminating or decentralizing federal student aid means fewer checks on predatory lending, fewer protections against discrimination, and more students locked out of college altogether,” says Andre Nichols, Director of Education Equity at the National Urban League.
In the 2020s, Black borrowers were already more likely to default on student loans—not because of personal failure, but because of wage disparities and intergenerational wealth gaps. Removing the Department of Education as the steward of student aid leaves borrowers to navigate a fragmented and potentially profit-driven landscape.
A Return to “States’ Rights”: A Familiar Phrase With Dangerous Implications
The phrase “returning power to the states” may sound innocuous, even democratic. But for Black Americans, it carries historical weight.
States’ rights were the battle cry used to defend slavery, to resist desegregation, and to oppose civil rights legislation. In education, states’ rights have too often translated to Black children being left behind—underfunded, underrepresented, and underserved.
The Department of Education was never perfect. But its existence represented a national commitment, however flawed, to at least try to address these disparities.
To dismantle it now, under the guise of “improvement,” is to undo decades of advocacy, litigation, and struggle.
What Comes Next?
Civil rights organizations are preparing legal challenges, while education advocates scramble to prepare for a decentralized future. Meanwhile, Black students, families, and educators—the very people most impacted—are left with uncertainty.
“This is a call to action,” says Dr. Franklin. “We must demand that Congress intervene, that governors resist implementation, and that communities build local coalitions to protect our children’s right to learn.”
Because the truth is this: The elimination of the Department of Education is not just about policy. It is about power. And unless we respond, that power will be taken from the very communities that fought hardest to gain it.
For continued coverage of education, equity, and policy impacts on Black communities, follow The Metro Record at TheMetroRecord.com.
