Supreme Court Allows Trump To Resume Education Department Dismantling
The conservative-dominated court, in an unsigned order, lifted a stay that had been placed by a federal district judge on mass layoffs at the department.
The three liberal justices on the nine-member panel dissented.
Trump pledged during his White House campaign to eliminate the Education Department, which was created by an act of Congress in 1979, and he moved in March to slash its workforce by nearly half.
Trump instructed Education Secretary Linda McMahon to "put herself out of a job."
Around 20 states joined teachers' unions in challenging the move in court, arguing that the Republican president was violating the principle of separation of powers by encroaching on Congress's prerogatives.
In May, District Judge Myong Joun ordered the reinstatement of hundreds of fired Education Department employees.
The Supreme Court lifted the judge's order without explanation, just days after another ruling that cleared the way for Trump to carry out mass firings of federal workers in other government departments.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in a dissent joined by justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, said in the Education ruling that "only Congress has the power to abolish the Department."
"The majority is either willfully blind to the implications of its ruling or naive, but either way the threat to our Constitution's separation of powers is grave," Sotomayor said.
Traditionally, the federal government has had a limited role in education in the United States, with only about 13 percent of funding for primary and secondary schools coming from federal coffers, the rest being funded by states and local communities.
But federal funding is invaluable for low-income schools and students with special needs. And the federal government has been essential in enforcing key civil rights protections for students.
After returning to the White House in January, Trump directed federal agencies to prepare sweeping workforce reduction plans as part of wider efforts by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) -- previously headed by Elon Musk -- to downsize the government.
Trump has moved to fire tens of thousands of government employees and slash programs -- targeting diversity initiatives and abolishing the Education Department, the US humanitarian aid agency USAID and others.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
DW
an hour ago
- DW
Could US Patriot systems be a gamechanger for Ukraine? – DW – 07/15/2025
US President Donald Trump has announced plans to sell billions of dollars worth of US weapons to European allies, who would then supply them to Ukraine. In addition to missiles and ammunition, the deal includes Patriot air defense systems which are a major wish list item for Ukraine.
Int'l Business Times
an hour ago
- Int'l Business Times
Trump Says Indonesia To Face 19% Tariff Under Trade Deal
President Donald Trump said Tuesday that he had struck a trade pact with Indonesia resulting in a lower US tariff on the country's goods than earlier threatened, alongside better market access. "Great deal, for everybody, just made with Indonesia," Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform, saying that he worked with the country's president directly. He later told reporters that Indonesia was "giving us access" and that goods from the Southeast Asian country would face a 19 percent tariff. Trump did not elaborate on the improved access that he had touted, although he stressed that Indonesia is "very strong on copper" and other materials. The Trump administration has been under pressure to finalize trade pacts after promising a flurry of deals, as countries sought negotiations with Washington to avoid Trump's tariff threats. But the US president has so far only unveiled deals with Britain and Vietnam, alongside an agreement to temporarily lower tit-for-tat levies with China. Last week, Trump renewed his threat of a 32 percent levy on Indonesian goods, saying in a letter to the country's leadership that this level would take effect August 1. It remains unclear when the lower tariff level announced Tuesday will take effect for Indonesia. "We have a couple of those deals that are going to be announced. India basically is working along that same line," Trump told reporters Tuesday, referring to market access. Indonesia's former vice minister for foreign affairs Dino Patti Djalal told a Foreign Policy event Tuesday that government insiders had indicated they were happy with the new deal. Trump in April imposed a 10 percent tariff on almost all trading partners, while announcing plans to eventually hike this level for dozens of economies, including the European Union and Indonesia. But days before the steeper duties were due to take effect, he pushed the deadline back from July 9 to August 1. This marked his second postponement of the elevated levies. Instead, since early last week, Trump has been sending letters to partners, setting out the tariff levels they would face come August. To date, Trump has sent more than 20 such letters including to the EU, Japan, South Korea and Malaysia. Canada and Mexico, both countries that were not originally targeted in Trump's "reciprocal" tariff push in April, also received similar documents outlining updated tariffs for their products. But existing exemptions covering goods entering the United States under a North American trade pact are expected to remain in place, a US official earlier said. Trump has unveiled blanket tariffs on trading partners in part to address what his administration deems as unfair practices that hurt American businesses. Analysts have warned that without trade agreements, Americans could conclude that Trump's strategy to reshape US trading ties with the world has not worked. "In the public's mind, the tariffs are the pain, and the agreements will be the gain. If there are no agreements, people will conclude his strategy was flawed," William Reinsch, senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, previously told AFP.
DW
2 hours ago
- DW
US drone war: Berlin not absolved of all responsibility – DW – 07/15/2025
Germany's top court has decided that the US air base in Ramstein may be used for lethal drone strikes, but Germany also has a duty to protect. Does the "right to life and physical integrity" guaranteed in Article 2 of Germany's Basic Law also apply when people are killed far away from Germany by another state with at least indirect German assistance? The Federal Constitutional Court, the equivalent to the US Supreme Court, was tasked with answering this tricky question on Tuesday. The case was brought by two men whose relatives were killed in a targeted US drone strike in Yemen in 2012. The technical infrastructure of the US air base in Ramstein was also used in the strike. In this specific case, the lawsuit was dismissed as unfounded. However, the ruling is not a complete carte blanche for potentially lethal drone missions in the future. According to the court's official reasoning, Germany must also protect fundamental human rights and the core norms of international humanitarian law abroad. However, the court also granted the federal government considerable leeway to determine its foreign and security policy. The mandate now announced is subject to two conditions: A sufficient connection to German state authority and the serious risk that international law could be systematically violated. According to the Constitutional Court, this was not the case with the drone strikes in Yemen. The court ruled that the US took sufficient account of the protection of civilians in its fight against international terrorism, and referred to "legitimate military targets." However, innocent people were killed alongside the suspected terrorists in the attack controlled from Ramstein, which brought criticism from legal scholar Paulina Starski of the University of Freiburg on the TV channel : "If they don't know exactly who they are attacking, they have to assume that it is a civilian." That is why targeted killings carried out by state actors are often highly problematic from a humanitarian and international law perspective. If the US Air Force could guide its missiles remotely from US territory straight to their targets, it would not need logistical support from its Ramstein airbase. But direct radio links between the US and Yemen are not possible, due to the curvature of the Earth. This is why signals are redirected via Ramstein, which makes the base indispensable for attacks in the Middle East. And they are very simple: A drone pilot sits in Florida, connected to the Ramstein hub via fiberoptic cables, guiding the deadly weapon to its target. The lawyer representing the unsuccessful plaintiffs from Yemen, Andreas Schüller, called the Constitutional Court's decision painful and disappointing. But he added that the duty to protect now formulated also provides guidelines for future conflicts: "Following today's ruling, there may be situations in which violations of human rights and international law abroad are brought before German courts." The federal government reacted with relief. State Secretary Nils Schmid of the Ministry of Defense emphasized that compliance with international law was always a priority. At the same time, he said, the ruling gave German security policy "the necessary leeway" to be a reliable you're here: Every Tuesday, DW editors round up what is happening in German politics and society. You can sign up here for the weekly email newsletter, Berlin Briefing.
