The DOE’s Final Bell? What’s Next for NJ Schools?

Graphic image credit: Ishani Bakshi for Public Square Amplified

Newark, NJ – The Trump administration’s recent executive order proposing the termination of the U.S. Department of Education (DoEd) has reignited debates on the role of federal oversight in education. While proponents argue that eliminating the DoEd would return power to states, critics warn of severe disruptions to funding, policy implementation, and equity in education. In New Jersey, where federal funding supplements state aid, the effects of Trump’s action could be profound.

According to the order, taxpayers have already spent around $200 billion at the federal level on schools during the COVID-19 pandemic, in addition to the more than $60 billion spent annually on federal school funding. The proposed executive order calls for the government to take all necessary steps to the maximum extent permitted by law, to facilitate the closure of the DoEd.

One of the most immediate concerns surrounding the elimination of the DoEd is its impact on education funding. Specifically, New Jersey relies on federal funds to supplement the $12.1 billion the state allocates annually for K-12 education. Programs such as Title I, which supports low-income school districts, and IDEA, which funds special education services, could be jeopardized.

“For several decades, the U.S. Department of Education has served as a valuable partner to New Jersey in protecting the rights of our students and funding critical supplemental programs for learners who need the most help,” New Jersey Education Commissioner Kevin Dehmer said.

A spokesperson for the New Jersey Office of the Secretary of Higher Education told Public Square Amplified that federal funding plays  a crucial role in college affordability and access through Pell Grants, student loans, TRIO, Work-Study, and other programs.

“Institutions also rely on federal research funding and workforce development grants that drive innovation and economic growth,” the spokesperson continued. “Eliminating the Department of Education would create uncertainty around these resources, weakening oversight and potentially reducing financial aid options for students.”

The spokesperson also said, “If states had to take on the responsibility of administering federal student aid, loan servicing, and civil rights protections like Title IX, New Jersey would need to greatly expand its infrastructure, oversight and investment. Disparities between states could also grow and hinder the transfer of knowledge and collaboration across state lines.”

New Jersey Higher Education Student Assistance Authority (HESAA) Executive Director Margo Chaly, echoed this sentiment, saying, “The U.S. Department of Education provides crucial services to students attending colleges and universities both here in New Jersey and around the country. Efforts to dismantle the Department of Education place these and other important functions at risk, threatening to deny students access to the financial support they need to obtain a degree that will open doors to greater economic mobility and career opportunities.”

Without this federal assistance, school districts would need to find alternative funding sources, likely shifting costs to local taxpayers or leading to cuts in services.

Top half of an NJEA ID card. Image credit: Renee Johnston for Public Square Amplified

The New Jersey Education Association (NJEA) also strongly opposes terminating the Department of Education.

NJEA’s officers, President Sean Spiller, VP Steve Beatty and Secretary-Treasurer Petal Robertson condemned the proposal, stating, “All New Jersey taxpayers should be outraged. We already get far less back from the federal government than we pay each year. Now, even the small return we used to get is being snatched away from our children to fund tax breaks for billionaires. These latest irresponsible cuts will shift costs down to local taxpayers who will be left scrambling to make up the difference while Trump, McMahon and Musk gloat.”

NJEA members across New Jersey joined nationwide protests against Trump's executive order, participating in “walk-ins” to highlight the dangers of dismantling the DoEd. 

NJEA Secretary-Treasurer Petal Robertson emphasized that losing federal oversight would disproportionately harm students in underserved communities. “Dismantling the department threatens funding for essential programs like Title I and IDEA,” she said. “It’s part of a disturbing pattern from this administration of targeting the most harmful cuts at communities that can least afford them.”

Local New Jersey high school students echo Robertson’s sentiments.

“I think it is very easy for states to cut funding and resources for marginalized groups' protections in education, such as gender, racial, and special needs protections,” said Iniya Karimanal, a junior at Princeton High School. “States can justify no longer protecting these groups because of their stretched budget. Supporting minority groups needs to be federally enforced to prevent the gradual loss of educational rights for students. “

Ananya Bhatla, a junior at JP Stevens High School and an involved member of the High School Democrats of America, underscored Karimanal’s sentiments. 

“I believe that federal oversight is necessary to protect students’ rights due to the fact that the government can help affirm student equity in schools,” explained Bhatla. “On a more local level, common biases and prejudices are more likely to get in the way, and honestly, the exhausted school administrators might just not have the bandwidth to alone enforce federal-level equity policies.”

A Quinnipiac University poll found that 60% of registered voters oppose the plan. The DoEd currently oversees Pell Grants, student loans, civil rights enforcement, and educational research. While the executive order suggests shifting these functions to other agencies, details are unclear.

The Department also manages a $1.6 trillion student loan portfolio—similar in size to a major bank like Wells Fargo. But while Wells Fargo has over 200,000 employees, the DoEd’s Federal Student Aid office has fewer than 1,500. The order argues the department isn’t equipped to function as a bank and should divest those responsibilities. However, legal experts note that executive orders can’t override Congress when it comes to funding or civil rights.

As of the writing of this article, there is hope yet for the Department of Education coming from the federal judiciaries. In a recent set of rulings, two federal judges intervened to halt Trump administration directives aimed at dismantling DEI efforts in public education. These decisions arose from lawsuits filed by national education and civil rights groups, who argued that the administration’s guidance was both vague and unconstitutional. The rulings effectively blocked attempts to tie federal funding to the elimination of DEI programs, shielding schools from abrupt funding cuts and punitive enforcement measures. While the executive order to dissolve the Department still looms, these legal challenges mark a significant pushback, signaling that the courts may serve as a counterbalance to sweeping federal overreach in education policy.

While the debate over the DoEd’s elimination continues, New Jersey officials and educators are preparing for potential changes. Regardless of what happens in Washington, the state’s education department has reaffirmed its commitment to maintaining high standards and equitable access to education, regardless of federal policy shifts. As discussions unfold, stakeholders across the political spectrum will need to weigh the benefits of increased local control against the risks of reduced federal support. 

“Whether in funding or in ensuring access to supportive educational environments, the NJDOE will continue its longstanding efforts to foster a world-class education system that meets the needs of all students,” said Kevin Dehmer.