ReportWire

Tag: department of education

  • What happens after the U.S. Department of Education is dissolved?

    [ad_1]

    eSchool News is counting down the 10 most-read stories of 2025. Story #1 focuses on the Trump Administration’s goal of dismantling the U.S. Department of Education.

    Key points:

    In light of Donald Trump assuming a second presidential term in 2025, conversations concerning dismantling the United States Department of Education have resurfaced. Supporters argue that federal involvement in education undermines state authority, while critics fear that removing the federal role could exacerbate inequities and hinder national progress. To evaluate the proposal, it is crucial to examine the federal and state roles in education, the historical and constitutional context, and the potential benefits and challenges of such a shift.

    The federal role in education

    The United States Constitution does not explicitly grant the federal government authority over education. As Lunenberg et al. (2012) noted, “Education is not a function specifically delegated to the federal government” (p. 327). Instead, under the Tenth Amendment, powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved for the states (McCarthy et al., 2019). This leaves education primarily under state jurisdiction, with federal involvement historically limited to indirect support rather than direct control.

    The United States Department of Education was established in 1979. It is responsible for overseeing federal funding for schools, enforcing federal laws in education, and ensuring equal access for students across the country.  Furthermore, it has played a significant role through legislation such as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and its successors: NCLB (No Child Left Behind) and ESSA (the Every Student Succeeds Act). These laws link federal funding to specific requirements, which aim to address inequities in education. Currently, federal contributions account for approximately 8 percent of funding for elementary and secondary education, with the remaining 92 percent coming from state and local sources (“The Federal Role,” 2017).

    The role of state and local control in education

    Education policy and administration have traditionally been state functions. States determine funding formulas, establish teacher certification requirements, and oversee curricula through their departments and boards of education (Lynch, 2016). Governors and state legislatures allocate funds, which are often distributed to schools based on enrollment, need, or specific programs (Lunenberg et al., 2012).

    Local school boards also play a critical role, managing day-to-day operations and responding to community needs. This decentralized structure reflects a longstanding belief that local authorities are better positioned to address the diverse needs of their communities. However, it has also led to significant disparities between states and districts in terms of funding, resources, and student outcomes.

    Dismantling the United States Department of Education 

    One of the most compelling arguments for dismantling the United States Department of Education lies in the principle of localized control. Critics argue that education is best managed by state and local governments because they are closer to the specific needs of their communities. Localized governance could allow schools to tailor their policies, curriculum, and resource allocation in ways that best fit the unique demographics of their regions. For example, schools in rural areas may have vastly different needs than those in urban centers, which is why local authorities are likely better equipped to address these disparities without the interference of federal oversight.

    The concern extends beyond general education. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which is enforced by the United States Department of Education, mandates that students with disabilities receive free and appropriate public education (FAPE) along with necessary services and accommodations. Similarly, the department oversees federal programs that support English Language Learner (ELL) students by helping schools provide tailored instruction and resources to students who are not native English speakers. Without federal oversight, it is possible that these programs could lose funding or be inconsistently applied across states, causing vulnerable populations to be without critical support.

    Advocates of dismantling the United States Department of Education also point to the financial burden of maintaining a federal agency. They argue that billions of dollars allocated to the department could be redirected to state education budgets, thereby allowing for more impactful initiatives at the forefront. By eliminating bureaucratic layers, states could potentially deliver education funding more efficiently, thereby focusing resources directly on teachers, classrooms, and students.

    Another critical function of the United States Department of Education is establishing and enforcing national education standards. Programs such as NCLB and ESSA aim to hold schools accountable for student performance and ensure consistency across states (albeit, there are arguments those programs have led to a culture of “teaching to the test” and have stifled creativity in the classroom), but allowing states and local districts to have greater freedom to design their own standards and assessments may fostering innovation while also leading to the quality of education varying dramatically from state to state and can cause challenges for students in transient populations due to a lack of cohesion disrupting their education and limiting their opportunities.

    Keeping the United States Department of Education 

    Dismantling the United States Department of Education raises significant concerns about equity. The department plays a crucial role in addressing disparities in funding education, as well as in funding access. Federal programs (i.e., Title I, free meals, counseling, after-school programs, etc.) provide additional resources to schools serving high numbers of low-income students, many of which are located in inner-city areas. Without the United States Department of Education, these programs might be eliminated or left to the discretion of states that have historically struggled to prioritize funding for underserved communities.

    Inner-city urban schools often face unique challenges (i.e., overcrowding, insufficient funding, higher rates of poverty among students, etc.). Many of these schools also serve disproportionately high numbers of students with disabilities and ELL students, thereby making federal support even more vital. The United States Department of Education enforces civil rights protections that ensures that all students (including vulnerable subgroups) receive equitable treatment. Dismantling the department could weaken these safeguards, thereby leaving marginalized communities more vulnerable to neglect. Therefore, the loss of federal oversight is a serious concern for public education. Historically, states have not always allocated resources equitably, and urban school districts have often been underfunded compared to their suburban counterparts. Federal intervention has been essential in addressing these disparities. Without it, inner-city schools may struggle to maintain even basic standards of education, thereby exacerbating poverty and inequality.

    All schools (not just inner-city schools) will be adversely impacted by dismantling the United States Department of Education. Federal funding supports Advanced Placement (AP) courses, STEM initiatives, and dual-enrollment opportunities. Dismantling the United States Department of Education could lead to inconsistencies in college admissions processes because states might adopt different graduation requirements and assessments. This lack of standardization could complicate admissions for students applying to out-of-state or prestigious universities. Furthermore, the United States Department of Education funds research initiatives that lead to the development of new teaching methods, technologies, and curricula. These innovations often benefit all schools, but without federal support, such research might stagnate leaving schools without access to cutting-edge educational resources.

    Conclusion

    In conclusion, the debate pertaining to dismantling the United States Department of Education has taken on new urgency under the Trump administration in 2025. While advocates of dismantling the department argue for greater local control and efficiency, the critics highlight the potential risks to equity and access.  As the nation grapples with this issue, it is essential to prioritize the needs of students (and communities). The ultimate goal must be to create a more equitable and effective education system that serves all students regardless of their background or zip code.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    [ad_2]

    Dr. Yuvraj Verma, Bessemer City Middle School and William Howard Taft University

    Source link

  • Were nurses ‘demoted’ from professional degrees? Not exactly

    [ad_1]

    Reports that a Trump administration change might make it harder for aspiring nurses to pay for their education sparked outrage online. 

    Some social media users said President Donald Trump had signed legislation demoting nursing degrees from professional degree status or reclassifying nursing degrees as non-professional degrees. 

    “The Dept. of Education just removed nursing from the list of ‘professional degree’ programs under the Administration’s new loan rules — a move nurses say threatens the future of patient care,” radio personality Angela Yee wrote Nov. 20 on Facebook. 

    Other social media posts passed on lists of degrees no longer considered “professional” under Trump, including nursing and also physical therapy, architecture, accounting, teaching, engineering and social work. 

    Graduate nursing students could soon face new federal borrowing limits, but these comments mislead by saying the Trump administration took nurses’ “professional” classification away.

    Trump’s sweeping One Big Beautiful Bill Act set federal loan borrowing limits for nonprofessional and professional graduate students. The first step in implementing those new loan limits is defining which degrees are “professional.” 

    An Education Department committee agreed on 11 professional degrees based on an existing definition in federal code; the decision is not final. 

    Nursing was not demoted or removed; it wasn’t on the list of professional degrees to start. 

    However, the changes mean students pursuing graduate degrees in nursing would have a lower borrowing cap compared with borrowers enrolled in professional degrees.

    The new loan caps don’t affect undergraduate students, and not all nursing jobs require graduate degrees.

    Nurse Rod Salaysay plays guitar for patient Richard Hoang in the recovery unit of UC San Diego Health in San Diego, Calif., on Sept. 30, 2025. (AP)

    A committee rule has not been finalized

    One provision in One Big Beautiful Bill Act eliminated a loan program that allows graduate students to borrow enough money to cover their program’s full cost. That program provided for limitless borrowing, said higher education finance expert and University of Tennessee, Knoxville professor Robert Kelchen.

    In its place, the Trump-era law implements new federal loan limits beginning July 1, 2026: up to $20,500 every academic year and $100,000 in total for grad students pursuing nonprofessional degrees and up to $50,000 every academic year and $200,000 in total for grad students seeking professional degrees. 

    The law defines professional students as those enrolled in degrees listed in federal code. That section lists examples of professional degrees that “include but are not limited to”:

    • Pharmacy (Pharm.D.) 

    • Dentistry (D.D.S. or D.M.D.) 

    • Veterinary Medicine (D.V.M.) 

    • Chiropractic (D.C. or D.C.M.) 

    • Law (L.L.B. or J.D.) 

    • Medicine (M.D.)

    • Optometry (O.D.).

    • Osteopathic Medicine (D.O.).

    • Podiatry (D.P.M., D.P., or Pod.D.).

    • Theology (M.Div., or M.H.L.)

    Nursing was never on that list. But graduate nursing students will be affected by the lower cap for nonprofessional graduate students. 

    “That distinction did not matter because graduate and professional students largely had the exact same loan limits,” Kelchen said. “Now, that distinction matters.”

    On Nov. 6, a committee charged with implementing the federal student loan changes approved a definition for  “professional students” that included the 10 degrees listed in federal code and clinical psychology. The committee also approved an expanded list of related programs that fall under those fields as “professional,” such as forensic psychology and counseling psychology.

    The public comment period is expected in early 2026, the department said. 

    The Education Department referred PolitiFact to a Nov. 24 “myth vs. fact” press release, which said its data shows 95% of nursing students borrow below the yearly loan limits and “are not affected by the new caps.”

    Loan limits will affect financing for advanced nursing degrees

    Previously, only people seeking advanced nursing degrees would have qualified for the graduate loan program that had no borrowing limits, known as Graduate PLUS. 

    About 45% of nurses entered the workforce with bachelor’s degrees, according to a March 2024 National Center for Health Workforce Analysis report. Some nurses have less than a bachelor’s degree; others start their careers after obtaining advanced degrees. 

    Some nurses choose to pursue a master’s (17%) or doctorate degree (3%) after they start working. Half of nurses said they used loans, and most nurses used federal student loans to finance their initial nursing degree, the report said.

    It typically takes two to three years to earn a nursing master’s degree and roughly five to eight years to earn a doctorate in nursing, Debra Barksdale, president of the American Academy of Nursing, said.

    At the University of Michigan’s nursing school in Ann Arbor, Mich., instructor Betsy Cambridge, center, talks to students next to a high-fidelity mannequin on March 28, 2016. (AP)

    Nurse practitioners, who must complete master’s or doctoral degree programs, fill in some gaps between nurses and doctors. They can perform and interpret diagnostic tests and diagnose and treat some conditions. 

    “The current demand for master’s- and doctorally-prepared nurses for advanced practice, clinical specialties, teaching and research roles far outstrips the supply,” Barksdale said. 

    Capping federal loans for graduate nursing programs could result in fewer nurses, Barksdale said.

    Graduate nursing degree program costs vary. Some historic research shows that by the time nursing students complete their advanced degrees, they have borrowed less than $100,000. It’s unclear how that breaks down year-by-year for the annual $20,500 cap. 

    Of 140 advanced nursing programs with debt data, 115 programs’ data showed their 2019 and 2020 graduates finished degrees with median student debt below $100,000, wrote Preston Cooper, an American Enterprise Institute higher education finance expert. He said lower-cost schooling options exist. 

    Our ruling

    Social media posts said the Trump administration removed nursing from the list of professional degree programs, affecting aspiring nurses’ student loan access. 

    A new Trump administration law imposes federal borrowing caps for people pursuing graduate degrees. The borrowing limits are lower for degrees not considered “professional.” An Education Department committee proposed a definition for “professional” that largely relies on an existing federal regulation that never included nursing. 

    Some nursing jobs require no advanced degree, and research shows nurses typically complete their degrees with loan amounts under the new cap. However, the proposed change would put a new burden on nursing graduate students seeking federal loans, because their degrees would not be eligible for the higher “professional” cap.  

    The statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details. We rate it Half True.

    PolitiFact Researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this report.

    RELATED: PolitiFact answers reader questions about the Big Beautiful Bill

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump Picked an Interesting Day to Dismantle the Department of Education

    [ad_1]

    The U.S. Department of Education will start to be dismantled on Tuesday, with some parts of the agency moving to offices in the Department of Labor and elsewhere, according to the Washington Post. It’s a wildly unlawful move, since a president can’t unilaterally decide to destroy an agency created by Congress. But President Donald Trump chose a pretty convenient day to do it.

    The Washington Post reports that it’s still unclear what offices from the DoE may be salvaged, but it could include the Office for Civil Rights, the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, and the Indian Education program.

    Social media accounts for the Department of Education and the Secretary of Education, Linda McMahon, shared a video with the caption “The clock is ticking…” The video features clips of Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush talking about how they wanted to abolish the agency. 

    Just because previous presidents wanted to abolish the agency doesn’t mean that Trump is allowed to do it without approval from Congress. The fact that other presidents were unable to do it should give some hint at how far outside the law Trump is operating.

    Why is Trump making his move on the Department of Education today? As it happens, the House of Representatives is scheduled to vote Tuesday on releasing the so-called Epstein Files—the documents held by the U.S. Department of Justice about the late sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, who died in jail in 2019. Trump has fought tooth and nail to keep the files from being released—perhaps because he was a close friend of Epstein—though he changed his tune Sunday after it became clear the House vote is likely to pass.

    “As I said on Friday night aboard Air Force One to the Fake News Media, House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files, because we have nothing to hide,” Trump wrote on Truth Social, rambling on further.

    It’s not true that Trump said the files should be released on Friday while he was on Air Force One. In fact, when Trump was asked about the files by a Bloomberg reporter, he snapped back, “Quiet! Quiet, Piggy.”

    Trump also said on Air Force One that Democrats are the ones who should be investigated. The president had previously tweeted that he ordered Attorney General Pam Bondi to look into connections between Epstein and Bill Clinton, along with other Democrats.

    The White House reportedly believes they’ve found a workaround when it comes to the illegal move to dismantle the Department of Education. Federal law requires all of these programs to be housed at the Department of Education. But the Washington Post reports they’re going to try making other government agencies run the Education Department programs “under a contract with the Education Department.”

    Nobody knows if this is going to be allowed to stand, but USAID was similarly dismantled in late January and early February, just after Trump started his second term. Dozens of lawsuits were filed, but the judicial system is clearly not equipped to handle a president who breaks things and just deals with the fallout, as the New York Times recently noted. President Trump’s decision to destroy the East Wing of the White House in a surprise move is a perfect example of that.

    The House is currently discussing the vote over the Epstein files, but even if they vote to release the files, it still needs to be taken up by the Senate. After that, it also needs to be signed by the president. And even after that, there’s a question of what Trump will actually allow to be released. Again, the president doesn’t see himself as bound by the law. Congress can pass all the laws it wants to compel the release, but that doesn’t mean it’ll necessarily happen.

    It seems like a given that dismantling the Department of Education will attract plenty of lawsuits. Whether those lawsuits actually accomplish anything is another question. Experts have pointed out that even if courts found the dismantling of USAID to be unlawful and ordered it reconstituted, it’s not something you could necessarily accomplish. Most people who worked at USAID have looked for new jobs and moved on with their lives.

    It’s a lot easier to destroy something than it is to build it back up. And that’s not just true of USAID, the Department of Education, and the East Wing. It’s true of everything being dismantled in the U.S. right now. And if you zoom out to the broadest historical view possible, it will likely take generations to rebuild the things being broken right now.

    [ad_2]

    Matt Novak

    Source link

  • When the Government Stops Defending Civil Rights

    [ad_1]

    In January of this year, however, shortly after Trump was sworn into office, the D.O.E. abruptly froze investigations into thousands of cases of alleged race and sex discrimination, including the case involving Blunt’s son. Linda McMahon, Trump’s Secretary of Education, lifted the freeze in March. A week later, the D.O.E. announced that it was closing seven of the O.C.R.’s twelve regional offices and firing around half of its roughly five hundred and fifty employees, as part of a broader “reduction in force” at the agency. In response, Public Justice, a nonprofit legal organization based in Washington, and attorneys at Glenn Agre Bergman & Fuentes sued the D.O.E., claiming that the drastic cuts would make it impossible for the agency to fulfill its statutory obligation to enforce civil-rights laws and would deprive children across the country who had been subjected to discrimination of a “meaningful path to relief.” One of the plaintiffs in the case was Tara Blunt, who, by this point, had withdrawn her son from public school and enrolled him at a private academy, despite the financial strain this imposed on her family. “I felt we didn’t have a choice—for his physical safety and his mental health,” she told me recently. “Every day, he would come home and say, ‘They made fun of my hair,’ ‘they called me this,’ ‘they called me that.’ He would say, ‘My heart hurts,’ or ‘I can’t take this anymore.’ ”

    Victims of racist bullying are not the only children whom the evisceration of the O.C.R. has harmed. Another plaintiff in the lawsuit filed by Public Justice is Karen Josefosky, a resident of Troy, Michigan, whose ten-year-old son has a severe, potentially life-threatening allergy to dairy products. In 2023, this condition, which qualified as a disability, turned him into the target of abuse and ridicule. “Allergies are dumb!” one student exclaimed while pouring milk on Josefosky’s son’s lunch. On another occasion, a group of students tripped him to the ground, put a cheese crown made of paper on his head, and then taunted him with actual cheese. Because her son’s allergy could be triggered by mere contact with dairy products and because the harassment continued despite her complaints, a pediatrician advised Josefosky to keep him home. She decided to pull him out of school—and then filed a complaint with the Office of Civil Rights, which handles thousands of disability cases every year. After reviewing the evidence, a thick binder of documents that Josefosky had collected, O.C.R. investigators told her that her son’s case was a slam dunk. “They said, ‘Your case is so clear—this is one of the easiest cases we’ve ever seen,’ ” she recalled.

    After the O.C.R. got involved, the school agreed to enter a facilitated mediation. But, after Trump was elected, the agency stopped responding to Josefosky’s e-mails, and the mediation effort stalled. Josefosky and her husband, Glenn, consulted a private attorney, who confirmed what they’d feared, which is that the shuttering of the O.C.R.’s regional offices had caused their son’s case to be set aside. (The lawyer, Elizabeth Abdnour, told me that an O.C.R. official informed her that, essentially, “nothing is happening right now—we’re shut down.”) Last spring, Karen Josefosky, who is a teacher, started homeschooling her son, which she said has prevented him from falling behind academically but which she knows cannot furnish him with the social benefits that attending school can provide. “He doesn’t have community,” she said, through tears. Her son, she added, was so shaken by the harassment that he had started trying to hide his allergies, which could put his safety at risk. “He’s been traumatized,” she said.

    In May and June, a U.S. district court issued overlapping injunctions staying the D.O.E.’s reduction in force and directing it to return the O.C.R. employees who had been fired to work. But the Trump Administration delayed complying with the orders, reinstating only eighty-five of the dismissed workers while appealing the decisions. On September 29th, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit paused the injunction pertaining specifically to the O.C.R., citing an emergency order issued by the Supreme Court that granted the Trump Administration permission to proceed with large-scale dismissals at the D.O.E. Two weeks ago, the eighty-five O.C.R. investigators who had been reinstated were laid off again, among them the senior manager who described that second firing as a gut punch. (On Tuesday, a judge issued a preliminary injunction in a related case, though it remains unclear how the decision will affect the latest wave of O.C.R. terminations.) Like Karen Josefosky, the senior manager has a son with a disability, and she expressed concern that parents of children like her own may now have no way to protect them from mistreatment. “My child has been harassed on the basis of his disability in the past,” she said. “I think about what it would have been like for him if I had not had the expertise that I have. That’s what parents are going to be left with, especially people who don’t have the resources to file a lawsuit. The most vulnerable are going to suffer the most.”

    Until recently, the complaints that the D.O.E.’s Office for Civil Rights investigated came primarily from students and families who contacted the agency at their own volition, reporting the harm they’d experienced—people like Karen Josefosky and Tara Blunt. Under Trump, the focus has shifted to investigations that have been generated internally, such as the announcement, in March, that forty-five universities across the country were being targeted for their “race-exclusionary” graduate programs. All the universities on the list—Duke, Cornell, Emory, George Mason—were being investigated for discrimination allegedly experienced by white students because of D.E.I. efforts. More recently, the O.C.R. threatened to cut federal funding to public schools in New York, Chicago, and Northern Virginia unless they stopped giving transgender and nonbinary students access to bathrooms and athletic programs consistent with their identity, which the Administration argues is a violation of Title IX, the law that bars sex-based discrimination in federally funded educational programs. (The Fairfax and Arlington County School Boards sued the Department of Education in August, noting that several courts have ruled that Title IX requires granting transgender students such access. A district judge dismissed their cases, but the school districts have since appealed the decision.) The Administration has also launched an unprecedented campaign to punish universities for allegedly failing to combat antisemitism on campuses where protests against the war in Gaza took place—charging them with compromising the safety of Jewish students, who have been singled out for protection that the members of other groups apparently don’t merit.

    The directed investigations that now dominate the O.C.R.’s agenda are “purely political,” the senior manager who’d been fired told me. Some conservatives would argue that this agenda has always been partisan, shaped by the woke ideology of the Democrats. But is protecting children with disabilities from discrimination really a partisan cause? Or investigating schools that have failed to protect teen-age girls from abuse? “Access to feeling safe in an educational setting is not a partisan issue,” said Amanda Walsh, the deputy director of external affairs at the Victim Rights Law Center, a nonprofit that represents victims of sexual assault, including students who have been subjected to Title IX violations such as sexual harassment and violence. (The center is also a plaintiff in the lawsuit filed by Public Justice against the D.O.E.) “Sexual assault is not a partisan issue,” Walsh continued. “The clients that we serve are both Democrats and Republicans, and most of them are kids and students. I think the safety of our kids in K-12 schools and of students in university settings is one of the few values a lot of people can agree on.”

    [ad_2]

    Eyal Press

    Source link

  • Fairfax County schools deny allegation social worker arranged, funded student abortions – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    Fairfax County Public Schools is denying allegations made by one of its teachers that a social worker employed by the school system facilitated student abortions.

    Fairfax County Public Schools is denying allegations made by one of its teachers that a social worker employed by the school system facilitated student abortions, and said its investigation has determined the teacher fabricated the accusation, likely as retaliation against the social worker.

    The Northern Virginia school district opened its investigation into the allegations after a teacher at Centreville High School went public with them in August. The teacher alleged that, in 2021, a social worker at Centreville encouraged and helped students get abortions without involving their parents.

    That teacher also appears to have coerced students, or manipulated their statements, to support her allegations against the social worker, according to the school system’s initial investigation. Lawyers for the teacher called the school district’s probe “a thin coating of whitewash over very serious, detailed and documented charges,” in a statement to WTOP.

    The teacher also said the school’s principal at the time, Chad Lehman, knew about the allegations and swept them under the rug. Promptly after the teacher went public in August, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin directed state police to launch an investigation. His office told WTOP that probe remains ongoing.

    U.S. Sen. Bill Cassidy, chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee, also sent a request to Fairfax County Public Schools requesting more information, as did the Department of Education.

    In its response Friday to those two federal inquiries, the school district said its external investigation is ongoing, and that it had compiled its initial findings and conclusions to comply with Senate and Education Department deadlines for information, Oct. 17.

    Americans United for Life, which describes itself as a pro-life organization and is representing the teacher, said it’s preparing its own response to the Senate and Education Department.

    “And we are confident that Fairfax County will come to regret their decision to rush through this so-called ‘investigation,’” the organization said in its statement to WTOP.

    According to “the facts presently known to FCPS,” the accused social worker “did not encourage, facilitate, or pay for any student abortion,” and former Centreville High School principal Chad Lehman “did not ‘cover up’ any such allegations or related facts; he promptly investigated” the allegations made by the Centreville teacher.

    When Lehman first learned of the teacher’s claims in 2022, years before the teacher went public with them, he looked into them and found they were not supported by facts, according to the school district’s letters to the Senate committee and Education Department.

    In 2023, the school system said the teacher prepared a complaint for Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares detailing the allegations of school-facilitated abortions, and that Miyares’ office may have known about the accusations a year or more ago and declined to investigate.

    The school system also contends Youngkin himself may have known of the allegations for more than a year before calling for state police to investigate. In a statement to WTOP, Youngkin’s office denies that.

    “The Governor learned of the allegations in August 2025 when they became public and immediately initiated this investigation,” the statement reads.

    ‘Originated as a response to disciplinary measures’

    According to Fairfax County Public Schools’ initial findings, the teacher pushing the allegations faced a complaint in 2022 that she purchased pregnancy tests for a Centreville student, which is in violation of school policies. The school looked into it, and in that investigation, the social worker was a witness. The school eventually determined the teacher violated school district policy.

    In a written report provided by Fairfax County Public Schools regarding the teacher’s pregnancy test controversy, the social worker reported to school officials that the teacher was pressuring a student to say that she did not buy her a pregnancy test, and the student told the teacher she did not want to lie.

    Then, the school system said, the teacher procured handwritten notes from the student to defend herself. In one note, the student writes she got a pregnancy test from a friend.

    The other note reads, in part, “She is very good teacher our friend and also a very good person, she is my best teacher of the school year she has helped me a lot in my studies, I think the other teachers are jealous of her because she has a very good relationship with the students and they love her.”

    According to the school district, school officials questioned whether the teacher coerced or manipulated the student to provide the handwritten notes. The teacher said she did not approach the student for the notes, but rather the student’s guardian came to her. Both the student and her guardian contradicted that claim, the school system said.

    Ultimately, the teacher was cited for unprofessional conduct in the pregnancy test incident, which “incensed” her.

    In an act of apparent retaliation, the school system said in its letter responding to federal inquiries, the teacher began raising the abortion allegations against the social worker and Lehman, the school’s then-principal.

    The teacher “has a documented history of making aggressive complaints against school staff and administrators whom she feels wronged by in some way,” the letter reads.

    In the teacher’s own words, the letter said, her discovery that the social worker “even might have some involvement in facilitating student abortions was a “godsend” because it was “evidence” she could use “against the woman who set me up with a pregnancy test,” the letter continues.

    By her own admission, from this point forward the teacher “actively conducted her own ‘investigation’ in an effort to compile ‘evidence’ against” the social worker, Fairfax County Public Schools said in its letter.

    Centerpiece supporting abortion claims is fake, FCPS says

    At the heart of the teacher’s retaliatory accusations, according to the school district, is a written and signed statement from the student who the teacher maintains got an abortion that was arranged and paid for by the Centreville High social worker.

    The teacher said she got it by confronting the student in November 2022 at the Thai restaurant she worked in. According to the school system’s handwriting analysis, the teacher actually wrote the statement and either coerced the student to sign it or falsified her signature.

    The statement, written in Spanish, says, in part, that the social worker “scheduled the appointment for me at the abortion clinic in Fairfax, paid the costs of that medical procedure, and kept everything quiet without informing my family.”

    According to comments and interviews from the teacher herself cited by the school system, the teacher had no knowledge to support those claims.

    Why now?

    Fairfax County Public Schools, in its letter to federal officials, suggested the promotion of the story years after the accusations were first leveled may be political.

    The teacher began raising the allegations of school-arranged and school-funded abortions in 2022, concerns the school district said Lehman, Centreville’s principal, looked into and dismissed. Lehman did not notify school district leaders, nor was he required to.

    Throughout his inquiry into the teacher’s accusations, Lehman followed up with her, asking if she had more information to share, the school district said, to which the teacher responded she did not.

    At the time of that correspondence, the teacher, by her own account, claimed to have a statement from the student saying the Centreville social worker scheduled and paid for her abortion, according to the school district.

    The teacher did not share that purported statement with Lehman.

    Shortly after Lehman looked into her accusations, the teacher prepared a complaint for Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares’ office in March 2023. Additionally, in 2022 and 2023, figures active in Republican politics in Virginia, including the Virginia Project, a political action committee, posted on social media hinting at accusations of school-funded abortions.

    Then, in August of this year, the teacher shared the story with a news outlet called W.C. Dispatch. The story breaking the news, “Bolted Doors and Broken Laws,” sits behind a paywall on that website.

    After that story was published, the teacher appeared on television and in several interviews, further spreading the accusations.

    “FCPS finds it very disturbing that so many of the individuals who are now (in the weeks leading up to a hotly contested election) shining a spotlight on these dated (and, our investigation shows, likely false) allegations have known about these same allegations for years. If those individuals believed these serious allegations had merit and thus believed that CHS students were truly at risk … presumably they would have taken action sooner,” the school system’s letter states.

    The teacher remains actively employed as a teacher at Centreville High School, while the social worker and Lehman, now a regional executive principal in the school system, have been placed on administrative leave pending the conclusion of investigations into the abortion allegations.

    Attorneys representing the teacher stand by her accusations in a statement to WTOP.

    “Fairfax County Public Schools’ preliminary response to Senate and U.S. Department of Education investigations into allegations of abortion trafficking made by our client … is just the usual papering-over job by an expensive Washington, D.C. law firm. Fairfax County taxpayers now have what they likely paid hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, for — a thin coating of whitewash over very serious, detailed and documented charges that school personnel enabled minor girls to get abortions without their parents or guardians knowing or consenting,” the statement from Americans United for Life reads.

    “AUL will have a detailed response to the Senate and DOE in the next few days, and we are confident that Fairfax County will come to regret their decision to rush through this so-called ‘investigation.’”

    WTOP will report on that response when it is made available.

    Fairfax County Public Schools’ full letter to the Department of Education, which was sent through legal counsel and describes more details from its investigation, can be found on the school system’s website.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Thomas Robertson

    Source link

  • Education Dept. withholds funds from Fairfax County schools amid pressure over bathroom policy – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    The Department of Education has started to withhold federal funding from Fairfax County Public Schools, a significant escalation in the battle over the Northern Virginia school district’s bathroom policies.

    The Education Department withheld federal funding from Fairfax County Public Schools, as pressure continues to build for the school district and several Northern Virginia school systems to amend their gender policy over the use of restrooms and locker rooms or risk losing federal funding.

    The school division had submitted a reimbursement request for a small amount, and that request has been denied, a person familiar with the situation but not authorized to speak publicly told WTOP. It’s unclear how much has been withheld and which programs will be affected.

    The action is the latest in the back-and-forth between the school division and the federal agency over the county’s policy for intimate facilities, such as bathrooms.

    Fairfax County and four other Virginia school systems said their bathroom policies are in compliance with federal law. However, the Education Department said policies that allow students to use the bathroom based on gender identity, rather than biological sex, violate Title IX.

    Education Department spokesperson Julie Hartman told The Associated Press, “The Department will not rubber-stamp civil rights compliance for New York, Chicago, and Fairfax while they blatantly discriminate against students based on race and sex.”

    Fairfax County schools will lose $3.4 million in Magnet School Assistance Program funding next fiscal year, which starts Oct. 1.

    An Education Department spokesperson said no funds have been withheld from the MSAP, but “the Office for Civil Rights cannot certify that Fairfax County Schools are in compliance with civil rights laws, so it cannot continue receiving the MSAP grant moving forward. The grant will expire on 9/30 and they will not be getting another MSAP grant.”

    Fairfax County filed a lawsuit to prevent funding from being frozen, but a federal judge declined to rule, citing a lack of jurisdiction. Since then, the division has filed an appeal and an emergency motion for injunction pending appeal.

    Fairfax County schools Superintendent Michelle Reid previously told WTOP the division could lose up to $167 million in federal funding, which supports students with disabilities and those who receive free school meals. School leaders in Arlington, Prince William County and the City of Alexandria have expressed similar concerns.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Scott Gelman

    Source link

  • Oregon Celebrates 2025-26 Regional Teachers of the Year – KXL

    [ad_1]


    The Oregon Department of Education, in partnership with the Oregon Lottery, has announced Oregon’s 2025-26 Regional Teachers of the Year.

    SALEM, OR – Monday, the Oregon Department of Education joined with the Oregon Lottery in announcing Oregon’s 2025-26 Regional Teachers of the Year.  The 16 regional winners have been notified through surprise announcement and local gatherings over the past two weeks in their respective communities.

    “We are thrilled to recognize this year’s Regional Teachers of the Year – outstanding educators whose tireless dedication, creativity, and compassion enrich the lives of students and communities across Oregon,” said Oregon Department of Education Director Dr. Charlene Williams. “Each recipient embodies the values of innovation, leadership, and inclusivity, and we are proud to honor, and learn from, their inspiring work. These extraordinary teachers remind us that great education transforms lives and strengthens communities.”

    Regional Teachers of the Year are selected through a nomination, application, and selection process led by the regional Education Service Districts across Oregon.  Applicants submit testimonials, essays, and letters of support, and are evaluated by regional panels on leadership, instructional expertise, commitment to equity, community involvement, understanding of educational issues, vision, and professional development.

    The Oregon Lottery provides a $1,000 prize to each Regional Teacher of the Year, and all 16 will now be considered a semi-finalist in the selection process for the 2025-26 Oregon Teacher of the Year, which will be announced later this fall.

    The Regional Teacher of the Winners are as follows:

    • Kimberly Agricola, Sunset Middle School, Coos Bay School District
    • Sarah Anderson, Dufur School, Dufur School District
    • Kacey Baxter, Newport Middle School, Lincoln County School District
    • Jennifer Bracken, Sutherlin East Primary, Sutherlin School District
    • Maria Crowley, Jefferson County Middle School, Jefferson County School District
    • Jason Galbraith, Sunset High School, Beaverton School District
    • Sally Golden, Community Transition Program, Springfield School District
    • Makenna Heffington, Fremont Elementary, Lake County School District
    • Amy Huffman, Little Explorers Preschool, Sherman County School District
    • Maximillian Jones, North Valley High School, Three Rivers School District
    • Jo Lane, Roosevelt High School, Portland Public Schools
    • Mona Mensing, Redmond High School, Redmond School District
    • Margot Peek, Willamette Primary School, West Linn-Wilsonville School District
    • Sena Raschio, Humbolt Elementary, John Day School District
    • Korrie Shull, John F. Kennedy High School, Mt. Angel School District
    • Marianne Smith, McLoughlin High School, Milton-Freewater School District

    Nominations for the 2026-27 Oregon Teacher of the Year award are being accepted now at oregonteacheroftheyear.org.

    More about:


    [ad_2]

    Tim Lantz

    Source link

  • Education Department eyes prestigious Fairfax County school over bathroom gender policy – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    A prestigious Fairfax County high school stands to lose millions of dollars in funding as the Education Department follows through on a threat to withhold funding to the Virginia school system over its gender policy regarding the use of restrooms and locker rooms.

    A prestigious Fairfax County high school stands to lose millions of dollars in funding as the Education Department says it will follow through on a threat to withhold funding to the Virginia school system over its gender policy regarding the use of restrooms and locker rooms.

    The department confirmed to WTOP it’s denying the certification of magnet school grant applications to Fairfax County Public Schools. The denial would result in a cut of about $3.4 million to Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology.

    The Department of Education has given Fairfax County schools until 5 p.m. Friday to comply.

    This comes on the heels of Education Secretary Linda McMahon’s social media post saying the department “will not certify that magnet schools in New York City, Chicago & Fairfax Public Schools are following the law when they are clearly not.”

    This latest move comes after the Department of Education claimed earlier this year that Fairfax County, Loudoun County, Prince William County, Arlington and Alexandria City public schools are violating Title IX with their policies that let students use bathrooms based on their gender identity rather than their biological sex.

    The school systems have maintained that they are in compliance with state and federal laws, and that the Education Department is misinterpreting Title IX. Fairfax County said it stands to lose $167 million in federal funding over the dispute.

    “The notification from the Department of Education regarding the withholding of grant funding is the latest in a series of efforts to defund and diminish the tradition of excellence of public education in Fairfax County Public Schools and in other school divisions around the country,” the school system said in a statement to WTOP.

    FCPS also revealed in its response that it and many other school districts have lost federal funding for what it calls “a critical five year youth school board based mental health program” called SBMH.

    “FCPS maintains that the DOE’s decision to label the division as ‘high-risk’ and threaten funding is not supported by any identifiable factors or evidence.”

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Kyle Cooper

    Source link

  • Loudoun Co. schools violated Title IX, retaliated by suspending male students, DOE says – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    Loudoun County Public Schools violated Title IX and retaliated against two male students being filmed in a boys’ locker room by a transgender student.

    WTOP’s Nick Iannelli discussed the DOE finding with Loudoun Now reporter Patrick Lewis

    The U.S. Department of Education said Loudoun County Public Schools violated Title IX and retaliated against two male students who reported being filmed in a boys’ locker room by a transgender student who identified as a male.

    The ruling, in the form of a press release, came the day after the families of the two students filed a federal lawsuit against LCPS, seeking to overturn suspensions for the two students at Stone Bridge High School in Ashburn, Virginia.

    The decision is the latest by the Department of Education, under President Donald Trump, focused on the issue of whether transgender children should be allowed to use bathrooms and locker rooms that correspond with their gender identity.

    “Loudoun County’s adherence to radical gender ideology has repeatedly placed its students in harm’s way,” said Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Craig Trainor. “Loudoun County failed to treat allegations of sexual harassment equally: it promptly investigated a female student’s complaint but quickly dismissed and failed to meaningly investigate two of its male students’ complaints of sexual harassment.”

    According to the DOE release, LCPS has 10 days to voluntarily enter the Department’s Resolution Agreement, which requires the school system to take the following actions:

    • Rescind the suspensions imposed on the two male students;
    • Review its findings to determine if discipline of the male students is warranted and, if Loudoun County determines that it is, the discipline must not exceed the discipline imposed on students who engaged in similar conduct and who had comparable disciplinary histories;
    • Issue letters apologizing for Loudoun County’s failure to properly investigate Title IX complaints;
    • Notify the students and their parents that Loudoun County Public Schools will promptly investigate the formal Title IX complaints in a manner that is compliant with the requirements of Title IX; and
    • Provide training to all high school and Loudoun County staff who receive or respond to reports of sexual harassment under Title IX.

    Contacted by WTOP for a response to the DOE findings, Loudoun County Public Schools referred to an earlier comment: “At no time would LCPS suspend a student simply because they expressed some kind of discomfort. A reading of our Title IX resources should make it clear that there is a high bar to launch a Title IX investigation and an even higher bar to determine a student is in violation of Title IX.”

    What this means, what comes next

    Shortly after the DOE statement, WTOP evening anchor Nick Iannelli spoke with Loudoun Now reporter Patrick Lewis. Iannelli said the facts about what happened in the boys’ bathroom aren’t clear to the public.

    “We know the school’s Title IX office found the two boys guilty of sexual harassment and sex based discrimination, and we only know that boys’ lawyers and their families released that,” said Lewis. “The schools are not going to release anything at all because they’re saying its protected student records.”

    While the school system’s statement provides no specifics, Iannelli posited that the statement suggests other factors led to the students’ suspensions.

    “There’s a lot of bars that you legally have to hit to even initiate a Title IX investigation once ou receive a complaint,” said Lewis. “Obviously, they found them guilty of harassment and discrimination, so from LCPS’s side, they’re saying they checked a lot of boxes, which obviously the boys and their attorneys are saying they were nowhere near checking.”

    In July, DOE’s Office of Civil Rights found five Northern Virginia school divisions — Loudoun, Fairfax, Prince William, Arlington, and the City of Alexandria — had violated Title IX. The school systems refused to abide by the proposed DOE resolution agreement.

    While the new release from the Department of Education doesn’t specify what steps would be taken if Loudoun doesn’t comply, “Presumably the Education Department will move further in their process to withdraw federal funding from the schools,” said Lewis.

    However, Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares referred his investigation into the locker room filming incident to the U.S. Department of Justice. “No word from them on whether they’re even investigating that, but potentially, down the road, there could also be criminal elements to all of this, as well,” said Lewis.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Neal Augenstein

    Source link

  • Fairfax Co. superintendent describes possible consequences if federal funding gets frozen – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    Days after a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit that Fairfax and Arlington Public Schools hoped would prevent federal money from being frozen, both Northern Virginia school districts have filed an appeal.

    Days after a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit that Fairfax and Arlington Public Schools hoped would prevent federal money from being frozen, both Northern Virginia school districts have filed an appeal.

    And Fairfax County Schools’ Superintendent Michelle Reid is warning about what’s at stake if the divisions don’t receive the funds.

    “It harms our most vulnerable children,” Reid told WTOP on Wednesday. “And in this case, tens of thousands of our most vulnerable children.”

    On Friday, Judge Rossie D. Alston Jr. of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia declined to rule in the case, writing that the court lacks jurisdiction. The appeal has been filed with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit of Virginia.

    WTOP has contacted the Department of Education for comment on the appeal.

    The step is the latest in the back and forth between several Virginia school divisions and the Department of Education. The federal agency designated five districts — Fairfax, Loudoun, Prince William, Arlington and the City of Alexandria — as “high risk” and threatened to withhold federal dollars, because they didn’t change their policies for intimate facilities, including bathrooms and locker rooms.

    The agency found the policies to be in violation of Title IX, because they allow students to use spaces such as bathrooms based on their gender identity instead of their biological sex. The school districts maintain they’re following the law.

    In Fairfax, Virginia’s largest school system, Reid said there’s $167 million in federal money that could be in jeopardy. It helps pay for Title I programs, IDEA programs to support students with special services and food and nutrition programs, “which for over 70,000 of our children may be the only meal of the day they actually receive.”

    In the coming weeks, Reid said the district will start submitting for reimbursement for Title I and food and nutrition programs, as it typically does.

    “That’s when we’re going to experience the potential for greater scrutiny and freezing of our funds, which has been what the Department of Education has indicated will happen,” she said.

    The school district has contacted the Education Department by phone and left messages, and sent a letter too, but Reid said they haven’t received a response.

    In Arlington, meanwhile, Superintendent Francisco Duran has said the high risk designation meant “effectively freezing $23 million” that is used to offer free meals and help support students with disabilities.

    In a statement, a spokesman for Arlington schools said Wednesday that while Judge Alston dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds, “his decision explicitly upheld the legality of our transgender student policy and its adherence to Title IX.”

    The appeal decision, the statement said, is to protect money for essential services, such as free meals and academic support, “for the students who rely on them most.”

    Reid said in Fairfax, she’s been communicating what’s at risk but is expecting the funding to be reinstated and not frozen.

    “The five jurisdictions here in Northern Virginia, as well as the divisions across the Commonwealth and across the country, remain committed to the power and promise of public education,” Reid said. “These attempts to defund public education simply won’t be tolerated.”

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Scott Gelman

    Source link

  • Fairfax County Public Schools appeals dismissal of suit against Education Dept. tied to gender policy – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    The fight over gender and bathrooms at Fairfax County Public Schools is continuing, as the school system appealed the dismissal of a lawsuit against the Department of Education.

    The fight over gender and bathrooms at Fairfax County Public Schools is continuing, as the school system appealed the dismissal of a lawsuit against the Department of Education to regain federal funding.

    The Fairfax County School Board on Tuesday filed the appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for Virginia’s Fourth Circuit after a judge denied the school district’s request to obtain a preliminary injunction on Friday that would prevent the Department of Education from freezing its federal funding.

    The Education Department placed Fairfax County Public Schools and four other Northern Virginian districts on “high risk” status, meaning the Education Department would scrutinize their federal reimbursement requests.

    This all comes after the Department of Education claimed Fairfax, along with Loudoun, Prince William, Arlington and Alexandria City public schools are violating Title IX with their policies that let students use bathrooms based on their gender identity rather than their biological sex.

    Judge Rossie Alston Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia ruled Friday that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.

    Fairfax and Arlington counties filed the initial lawsuit last month.

    In a statement, FCPS Superintendent Michelle Reid said they believe their current policies on Title IX regarding bathroom and locker room usage comply with state and federal law. They are continuing to reach out to the DOE about the “high risk” status designation.

    “These vital federal funds that remain at risk support food and nutrition services, as well as staffing cafeterias. Other funding supports services and instruction for students with disabilities, aims to improve student achievement, enhances technical education, promotes teacher development, and funds community education programs,” Reid wrote.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Luke Lukert

    Source link

  • Oregon Nonprofit Serving Disabled Kids Loses Federal Funds Over DEI Training – KXL

    [ad_1]


    Central Oregon Disability Support Network serves families with children with disabilities across eight Oregon counties.

    Bend, Ore. – An Oregon nonprofit serving kids and families with disabilities may be forced to shut down many of its services, after losing a major federal grant.

    The U.S. Department of Education just notified Central Oregon Disability Support Network it would not continue the final payment of a five-year grant. Executive Director Dianna Hansen says CODSN stands to lose $150,000, “Which doesn’t seem like a lot, when you’re the federal government. But it’s a lot for our small nonprofit that serves eight small counties in Oregon.” She adds, “Essentially, it’s almost half of our budget.” The nonprofit plans to appeal, but Hansen says, if the decision stands, “We’re going to be laying staff off. We’re going to be closing if not all, most of our offices.”

    Hansen says USDOE said in its “Notice of Non-Continuation,” the department pulled the funds because of two lines in the original 50-page application submitted in 2021, which mentions DEI training, “‘Both our board and staff continue to actively pursue professional development to diversity, equity and inclusion.’” But Hansen tells KXL that training was conducted from 2018-2020, before the grant was awarded. And, “It was training for our board and staff to really understand the diverse types of disability.” She says they learned about the differences in needs for someone who is visually impaired, compared to someone in a wheelchair. And, Hansen says, they learned more about workign with the types of families CODSN serves, “It was really around understanding families in poverty and generational differences- we serve a lot of grandparents raising grandchildren.” Click here to read CODSN’s officials response.

    Hansen notes nearly every other state applicant in the federal program included similar language, but, “They only removed the grants from Oregon, New York and Washington state.” She says no one from USDOE reached out for clarification on the language used in the 2021 application, nor was there an opportunity to update the nonprofit’s information.

    CODSN’s grant funds a parent resource center serving 4,000 families navigating special education systems across eight rural Oregon counties, include Deschutes, Jefferson and Wheeler counties. 

    Several members of Oregon’s Congressional delegation pledged to help restore the funding. Hansen says only Rep. Cliff Bentz did not respond to her request. 

     

    More about:


    [ad_2]

    Heather Roberts

    Source link

  • U.S. Students Just Scored Their Lowest Marks in History

    [ad_1]

    The kids are not doing so alright. New federal data out this week suggests that high school seniors’ math and reading skills have sunk dramatically in the wake of the pandemic.

    On Tuesday, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)—the first collected in the post-pandemic era. It found that 12th graders’ average math and reading scores in 2024 were the lowest on record, while 8th graders’ science scores also dropped since the last measure.

    “These results are sobering,” NCES Acting Commissioner Matthew Soldner said in a statement from the organization.

    The “Nation’s Report Card”

    The NAEP is a project run by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), which is part of the U.S. Department of Education, and it’s commonly known as the Nation’s Report Card.

    The organization conducts regular tests in mathematics, reading, and other subjects among a nationally representative sample of fourth, eighth, and 12th graders. The primary assessments are performed every two years for the country’s fourth and eighth graders and every four years for the 12th graders.

    In 2024, 12th graders scored the lowest in mathematics on average since 2005, when the current version of the test was implemented. They also scored the lowest in reading on average since 1992, when the NAEP began its regular assessments. In math, 45% of 12th-graders performed below the NAEP Basic achievement level this past year; in reading, 32% of 12th-graders performed below the NAEP Basic achievement level.

    High school seniors are also missing school more often. 31% of 12th-graders reported missing three or more days from school in the previous month in 2024, compared to 26% who said the same in 2019.

    Meanwhile, 8th graders’ average scores in science declined between 2019 and 2024 and were the lowest since 2009. About 38% of eighth-graders performed below the NAEP Basic achievement level.

    Why are kids doing worse in school?

    These assessments are notably the first of their kind to be conducted in the post-pandemic era.

    Several studies have found that the pandemic and its disruptions to daily life, which include remote learning for many students, also worsened children’s well-being and educational development, though these impacts were not necessarily felt equally across different ages and populations. Newer issues like the rapid proliferation of generative AI might also be harming kids’ ability to learn.

    But Soldner cautions that at least some of the decline seen in these scores is likely the result of long-simmering factors.

    “The drop in overall scores coincides with significant declines in achievement among our lowest-performing students, continuing a downward trend that began even before the COVID-19 pandemic,” he said.

    Dire as these scores are, the situation could get worse. In his second term, President Donald Trump has implemented drastic cuts in funding and jobs from the Department of Education as part of an effort to effectively dismantle the agency for good, while the GOP-led congress is set to secure further cuts to the agency’s budget next fiscal year.

    [ad_2]

    Ed Cara

    Source link

  • Trump promises to protect prayer in public schools

    [ad_1]

    President Donald Trump announced Monday the Department of Education would be issuing upcoming guidance that protects prayer in public schools.

    Trump made the announcement at the White House’s Religious Liberty Commission hearing, held at the Museum of the Bible.

    “I’m pleased to announce this morning that the Department of Education will soon issue new guidance protecting the right to prayer in our public schools,” he said, to audience applause.

    The commission’s hearing on Monday was intended to look at the “historic landscape of religious liberty in the educational setting,” the Department of Justice said.

    “As president, I will always defend our nation’s glorious heritage, and we will protect the Judeo Christian principles of our founding, and we will protect them with vigor,” Trump said. “We have to bring back religion in America, bring it back stronger than ever before.”

    Trump said the commission was gathered Monday to discuss the “grave threats to religious liberty in American schools.”

    “I will tell you, a lot of progress has been made in the last eight months, tremendous progress, more than I thought we could make in so many ways,” he said.

    Trump said that over the course of the country’s history, the Bible was found in “every classroom in the nation.” On Monday, however, he said students are “indoctrinated with anti-religious propaganda and some are even punished for their religious beliefs.”

    The right to pray in school is protected under the First Amendment’s religious freedom guarantees.

    It was the commission’s second public meeting. In June, Attorney General Pam Bondi addressed members of the commission and said they will ensure Americans can live out their faith freely and “without fear.”

    President Donald Trump speaks to the White House Religious Liberty Commission during an event at the Museum of the Bible, Monday, Sept. 8, 2025, in Washington. | Evan Vucci

    Bondi expressed gratitude for Trump’s efforts to expand religious liberty and the establishment of the presidential commission.

    Trump signed an executive order on May 1, which is National Day of Prayer, to create the commission. Its panel members include TV talk-show host Phil McGraw, Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and former U.S. Housing Secretary Ben Carson, among others.

    The commission plans to host several hearings over the next several months.

    While Trump, Bondi and the commission’s members are celebrating the expanded efforts, some groups are concerned that the actions are only focused on promoting Christian beliefs. Trump’s order doesn’t specifically cite Christianity, but a fact sheet says the task force has been designed to “eradicate anti-Christian bias.”

    Department of Education Press Secretary Savannah Newhouse said in a statement to The Deseret News that free exercise of religion is a “founding principle” that is protected by the Constitution.

    “The Department of Education looks forward to supporting President Trump’s vision to promote religious liberty in our schools across the country,” Newhouse said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Judge won’t rule on Fairfax, Arlington schools lawsuit to prevent federal funding freeze – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    A federal judge on Friday decided not to rule in the case of two Northern Virginia school systems suing to prevent the Department of Education from freezing federal funding because the districts haven’t changed their policies for intimate spaces.

    A federal judge on Friday decided not to rule in the case of two Northern Virginia school systems suing to prevent the Department of Education from freezing federal funding because the districts haven’t changed their policies for intimate spaces.

    In a 13-page filing, Judge Rossie D. Alston Jr. of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia said that because Fairfax and Arlington Public Schools’ complaints are about requests “to order the payment of money,” the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.

    The filing stated that jurisdiction lies with the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

    The decision comes days after the divisions first filed the lawsuit, hoping to stop the department from freezing federal funds. The two districts, as well as Loudoun, Prince William and the City of Alexandria school systems, have been scrutinized by the agency because of their bathroom policies.

    The Education Department has said policies that let students use bathrooms based on gender identity violate Title IX, and that schools should adopt policies that allow kids to use bathrooms based on biological sex.

    “We are considering our next steps in the courts as we strongly believe the Department of Education’s classification of FCPS as a ‘high-risk’ entity effectively holds the division hostage and violates binding precedent from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals,” Fairfax County Public Schools said in a statement. “This designation unfairly harms tens of thousands of our most vulnerable students who depend on these federal dollars.”

    WTOP has contacted Arlington Public Schools and the Department of Education for comment.

    Last month, the Education Department announced it had placed five Northern Virginia districts on “high risk” status and would scrutinize their federal reimbursement requests, because they didn’t change their policies. While Fairfax and Prince William counties have said they don’t get federal funding through Title IX, they do receive federal dollars as a small fraction of their budgets.

    “These critical federal dollars are used to support food and nutrition services, as well as the staffing of cafeterias,” the Fairfax County schools’ statement said. “Other funding is used for services and instruction for students with disabilities and students from low-income families, to increase student achievement, support technical education, promote teacher development, and fund community education programs.”

    Arlington, meanwhile, previously said the Education Department’s move resulted in freezing $23 million in funding. In a post on the division’s website announcing the lawsuit, Superintendent Francisco Durán said that money pays for free breakfast and lunch for thousands of low-income students and support for special education students.

    The Education Department gave the five Northern Virginia school systems a deadline to comply with the request to change their policies. All of them told the agency they believe their current practices are in compliance with the law.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Scott Gelman

    Source link

  • Arlington, Fairfax school systems sue Education Department over funding freeze tied to gender policies – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    The lawsuits come after the Education Department requested Arlington Public Schools, Fairfax County Public Schools, and three other Northern Virginia school districts to change their policies that allow transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms that align with their gender identity, rather than their biological sex.

    Arlington and Fairfax counties’ public school districts are suing the Department of Education in an effort to protect their federal funding from being frozen in retaliation for the school systems’ gender policies surrounding the use of bathrooms and locker rooms.

    The lawsuits come after the Education Department requested Arlington Public Schools, Fairfax County Public Schools, and three other Northern Virginia school districts to change their policies that allow transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms that align with their gender identity, rather than their biological sex.

    The school systems refused, and the Education Department responded by placing them on “high-risk” status, meaning the department will scrutinize their federal reimbursement requests.

    In their complaints, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Arlington and Fairfax county schools are seeking to have that status reversed. The school districts say tens of millions of dollars for critical services for students are on the line.

    “These federal funds are not abstract numbers on a spreadsheet; they represent vital support for our most vulnerable children. This funding supports our food and nutrition services, services for our students with disabilities, students from low-income families, and programs that promote teacher development and student achievement across the division,” Fairfax County Public Schools Superintendent Michelle Reid said in a letter addressed to staff and families.

    “The DOE’s ‘high-risk’ designation unfairly harms tens of thousands of our students by threatening these essential services,” Reid continued.

    FCPS said in a statement up to $167 million in federal funding has been essentially frozen.

    In his letter to the Arlington Public Schools community, Superintendent Francisco Durán said the Education Department’s “high-risk” designation effectively halts $23 million in funding that the school district relies on.

    That funding, Durán said, is mainly used to provide more than 8,000 low-income students with free meals and thousands of special needs students with counseling and other educational support.

    In its complaint filed Friday, Arlington Public Schools asserts the Education Department’s funding freeze violates Title IX, the Administrative Procedures Act and the Spending Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The school system also said the department is incorrectly interpreting Title IX.

    Fairfax County schools state, in its complaint also filed Friday, that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit’s ruling in Grimm v. Gloucester County School board binds the school system. In that decision, FCPS wrote, the Fourth Circuit ruled that the Equal Protection Clause and Title IX compel local school boards to provide students with access to facilities that correspond with their gender identity.

    This week, Reid said in her letter that her school system reached out to the Education Department, “to address the impossible position that the DOE has placed on our school division — whether to violate a federal court ruling regarding the support of our transgender students or risk this critical funding. The DOE did not respond.”

    Durán said he expects a judge to hear the case quickly and issue an order that will preserve federal funding.

    WTOP has reached out to the Department of Education for comment.

    The Washington Post first reported the lawsuit.

    WTOP’s Scott Gelman contributed to this report.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Thomas Robertson

    Source link

  • KU researchers publish guidelines to help responsibly implement AI in education

    [ad_1]

    This story originally appeared on KU News and is republished with permission.

    Key points:

    Researchers at the University of Kansas have produced a set of guidelines to help educators from preschool through higher education responsibly implement artificial intelligence in a way that empowers teachers, parents, students and communities alike.

    The Center for Innovation, Design & Digital Learning at KU has published “Framework for Responsible AI Integration in PreK-20 Education: Empowering All Learners and Educators with AI-Ready Solutions.” The document, developed under a cooperative agreement with the U.S. Department of Education, is intended to provide guidance on how schools can incorporate AI into its daily operations and curriculum.

    Earlier this year, President Donald Trump issued an executive order instructing schools to incorporate AI into their operations. The framework is intended to help all schools and educational facilities do so in a manner that fits their unique communities and missions.

    “We see this framework as a foundation,” said James Basham, director of CIDDL and professor of special education at KU. “As schools consider forming an AI task force, for example, they’ll likely have questions on how to do that, or how to conduct an audit and risk analysis. The framework can help guide them through that, and we’ll continue to build on this.”

    The framework features four primary recommendations.

    • Establish a stable, human-centered foundation.
    • Implement future-focused strategic planning for AI integration.
    • Ensure AI educational opportunities for every student.
    • Conduct ongoing evaluation, professional learning and community development.

    First, the framework urges schools to keep humans at the forefront of AI plans, prioritizing educator judgment, student relationships and family input on AI-enabled processes and not relying on automation for decisions that affect people. Transparency is also key, and schools should communicate how AI tools work, how decisions are made and ensure compliance with student protection laws such as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and Family Education Rights and Privacy Act, the report authors write.

    The document also outlines recommendations for how educational facilities can implement the technology. Establishing an AI integration task force including educators, administrators, families, legal advisers and specialists in instructional technology and special education is key among the recommendations. The document also shares tips on how to conduct an audit and risk analysis before adoption and consider how tools can affect student placement and identification and consider possible algorithmic error patterns. As the technologies are trained on human data, they run the risk of making the same mistakes and repeating biases humans have made, Basham said.

    That idea is also reflected in the framework’s third recommendation. The document encourages educators to commit to learner-centered AI implementation that considers all students, from those in gifted programs to students with cognitive disabilities. AI tools should be prohibited from making final decisions on IEP eligibility, disciplinary actions and student progress decisions, and mechanisms should be installed that allow for feedback on students, teachers and parents’ AI educational experiences, the authors wrote.

    Finally, the framework urges ongoing evaluation, professional learning and community development. As the technology evolves, schools should regularly re-evaluate it for unintended consequences and feedback from those who use it. Training both at implementation and in ongoing installments will be necessary to address overuse or misuse and clarify who is responsible for monitoring AI use and to ensure both the school and community are informed on the technology.

    The framework was written by Basham; Trey Vasquez, co-principal investigator at CIDDL, operating officer at KU’s Achievement & Assessment Institute and professor of special education at KU; and Angelica Fulchini Scruggs, research associate and operations director for CIDDL.

    Educators interested in learning more about the framework or use of AI in education are invited to connect with CIDDL. The center’s site includes data on emergent themes in AI guidance at the state level and information on how it supports educational technology in K-12 and higher education. As artificial intelligence finds new uses and educators are expected to implement the technology in schools, the center’s researchers said they plan to continue helping educators implement it in ways that benefit schools, students of all abilities and communities.

    “The priority at CIDDL is to share transparent resources for educators on topics that are trending and in a way that is easy to digest,” Fulchini Scruggs said. “We want people to join the community and help them know where to start. We also know this will evolve and change, and we want to help educators stay up to date with those changes to use AI responsibly in their schools.”

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    [ad_2]

    Mike Krings, the University of Kansas

    Source link

  • Trump has won a second term–here’s what that means for schools

    [ad_1]

    This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for their newsletters at ckbe.at/newsletters.

    On the campaign trail, Donald Trump pledged to get rid of the U.S. Department of Education, expand school choice, roll back new protections for LGBTQ students, and deport millions of undocumented immigrants.

    Now that the former Republican president is headed to a second term, the question becomes how likely Trump is to act on his most extreme or implausible proposals and what effects students, teachers, and parents will see in the classroom.

    Trump won a decisive victory, picking up nearly every swing state and gaining ground among young voters and voters of color who have been essential members of the Democratic coalition.

    Chalkbeat spoke to advocates, experts, and former education department officials about what to expect from the next administration. They widely agreed that President Joe Biden’s Title IX rewrite, which extended new protections for transgender students and is currently tied up in the courts, will be repealed, that civil rights enforcement will look very different, and that future education budgets will be more austere.

    But they disagreed on how likely it is that Trump would actually do away with the U.S. Department of Education and how much progress he might make toward federal support for school choice.

    A lot will depend on who controls Congress. Votes are still being counted in key races, but Republicans will control the Senate. Control of the House remains unclear and may not be known for days. A trifecta could clear the way for a broader Trump agenda. If Democrats take control of the House, Trump would have to rely more on his executive authority. But even on some key conservative priorities, Republicans are not unanimous, and some may balk at proposals they see as expanding the federal role or disadvantaging their constituents.

    Trump’s pick for education secretary — whether he opts for an experienced administrator or a dedicated culture warrior — will also shape his education agenda.

    Calls to abolish the Department of Education have new momentum

    Arguably this has been Trump’s most consistent promise on education policy but also the one that seems most far-fetched to some political observers. Conservatives have talked about getting rid of the department for almost as long as it’s existed, and Trump didn’t make any moves to dismantle it in his first administration.

    Fully dismantling the department would require an act of Congress. But Trump could limit its reach in other ways, such as eliminating or moving programs, removing career bureaucrats, and proposing much tighter budgets.

    But Jim Blew, who served in Trump’s education department in his first administration and went on to found the Defense of Freedom Institute, said Trump has been adamant that he wants to get rid of the department and that alone gives the idea more “heft.” Blew also believes public support for a federal role in education is changing. Many people don’t think the federal investment in COVID recovery yielded much, he said. At the same time, people see initiatives such as student loan forgiveness and protections for transgender students as examples of federal overreach.

    It would take months to take the department apart, Blew said, because every function mandated by Congress would need a new home. But that could be done, he said. Civil rights enforcement could move to the U.S. Department of Justice, for example, and Title I funding for high-poverty schools could become a block grant administered by the U.S. Department of Human Services.

    Trump has been clear that his priorities are economic recovery, immigration, and national defense, Blew said, but that doesn’t mean he won’t follow through on education promises.

    “It doesn’t need a lot of attention,” Blew said. “It needs political capital. And he can expend that while remaining focused on other priorities.”

    Immigration enforcement could ripple through school communities

    Trump made demonization of immigrants the centerpiece of his campaign, highlighting at every turn examples of crimes committed by undocumented immigrants or asylum seekers and the impact of immigration on American communities and schools.

    Trump has promised to carry out the largest deportation operation in American history. Some experts on immigration policy have said such an effort would be legally and logistically challenging, as well as very expensive. Nonetheless, most observers expect to see an increase in enforcement.

    Previous workplace raids have had widespread impacts on students whose parents were arrested, as well as on the broader community. An estimated 4.4 million American children have at least one undocumented parent, and some former Trump immigration officials have suggested that families be deported together.

    Mike Petrilli, president of the conservative education advocacy organization The Fordham Institute, believes Trump’s education policies won’t make much difference in American classrooms, but his immigration policy may be felt in dramatic ways.

    “It’s what he’s campaigned on, it’s what he’s promised to do, and he’d have a pretty free hand to do it,” said Petrilli, who has argued that American schools have a moral obligation as well as a legal one to educate all children who live here.

    “The chances that it’s a humanitarian disaster are quite high,” Petrilli said. “Is he going to put people in camps? Will that include families? Are there going to be schools in these camps? I don’t see any reason we should believe they won’t give that a try.”

    Even if enforcement is spotty, changes to federal policy have the potential to sow confusion and chaos in local communities, said Janelle Scott, a professor at University of California Berkeley. Some families may keep children home from school out of fear, she said. The messages that local law enforcement and school district officials send to families in this situation could make a difference.

    Transgender students could lose new protections as civil rights enforcement changes

    When the Biden administration issued new Title IX rules that clarified and strengthened protections for transgender students, Republican states and conservative groups, including Blew’s Defense of Freedom Institute, quickly filed lawsuits that led to the rules being blocked in a majority of states.

    Conservatives argued that the new rules eroded protections for cisgender girls because they might have to share bathrooms and locker rooms with transgender classmates and affected the free speech rights of teachers who might be forced to use pronouns and names they disagreed with. They also argued the Biden administration overstepped by defining discrimination on the basis of gender identity as a form of sex discrimination.

    Trump is expected to rescind the Biden rules, a move that would still require a lengthy bureaucratic process. But some observers have larger fears for a Trump administration. He has repeatedly accused schools of performing gender surgeries without parental permission — a false and baseless claim — and attacked the idea of gender-affirming care for youth, as well as participation in sports by transgender athletes.

    “There have been fantastical claims, but undergirding that is a deep hostility to queer kids as well as allegations that schools are engaging in child abuse if they protect the rights of queer kids,” said Scott, the UC Berkeley professor.

    Trump’s first administration also revoked Obama-era guidance on school discipline that aimed to reduce suspensions and expulsions for students of color and emphasized quick resolution of complaints. Some conservative groups have also used civil rights complaints to go after programs that aim to support Black student excellence or mentor teachers of color.

    Rick Hess, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said a Trump education department or justice department could make high-profile examples of a few school districts’ diversity initiatives and bring about more widespread change, similar to how the Obama administration targeted districts over school discipline.

    School choice gets a modest momentum boost

    Expanding taxpayer funding for private schools and home-schooling have topped the conservative education agenda in recent years. A proposed federal tax credit scholarship program backed by Trump’s first education secretary, Betsy DeVos, failed to get any traction. But during Biden’s presidency, Republican-led states have expanded or started private school choice programs, some of which offer money to nearly all interested families.

    On Fox News, Trump promised to sign school choice legislation that passed a House committee, and at a barbershop in the Bronx, he talked about the importance of school choice.

    Blew expects Trump to push for a tax credit scholarship proposal similar to the one drafted during his first presidency.

    Petrilli isn’t convinced that Trump cares that much. “It’s a stretch to say that he’s made it a priority on the campaign trail,” he said. “He has to be reminded to talk about it.”

    Petrilli is also not convinced there would be enough support even in a Republican-controlled Congress to send a bill to Trump’s desk. Some rural Republicans, whose constituents have few private school options, are skeptical. So are small government conservatives who don’t want to expand federal programs.

    Voters in three states — including two that Trump won by large margins — rejected school choice at the ballot on Tuesday, indicating that even many conservatives have qualms about spending public money on private schools.

    But Congress will have to reauthorize Trump’s tax cuts, and a tax credit that allows businesses and individuals to write off donations to private school scholarships could be included there. Observers also expect to see a push to allow families to use money in tax-favored 529 accounts to pay for homeschooling expenses, tutoring, and other educational needs. That money already can be used for private school tuition.

    This is a developing story and will be updated.

    Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

    Related:
    The purpose of a K-12 education: Who decides and how do we get there?
    Learn how to modernize your K-12 financial operations
    For more on education policy, visit eSN’s Educational Leadership hub

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    [ad_2]

    Erica Meltzer, Chalkbeat

    Source link

  • Perilous Psittacine Donald Trump Parrots Project 25 With Promises To Close The Department Of Education, Egregiously Says Slavery-Teaching Schools Should Be Defunded

    Perilous Psittacine Donald Trump Parrots Project 25 With Promises To Close The Department Of Education, Egregiously Says Slavery-Teaching Schools Should Be Defunded

    [ad_1]

    In today’s episode of Trump Is Still Trying To Keep America Dumb For Obvious Reasons, the ex-president made an in-person appearance on Fox & Friends to, once again, float around the idea of shutting down the federal Department of Education to ensure that everything educators are teaching in classrooms is whitey-approved. (He didn’t actually say that last part, but the last few years of anti-woke GOPropaganda proves that’s exactly what he was getting at.)

    Source: Michael M. Santiago / Getty

    “We’re going to take the Department of Education — close it — we’re going to close it,” Trump said of his plans should he be elected to the White House in November. 

    He also said he would punish schools that teach about slavery. When Fox & Friends co-host Brian Kilmeade asked about schools in liberal states or cities teaching that America was “built off the backs of slaves on stolen land,” Trump said they’d be defunded.

    “Then we don’t send them money,” replied Trump.

    Trump made the same campaign promise last month during a rally in Wisconsin.

    “I say it all the time, I’m dying to get back to do this. We will ultimately eliminate the federal Department of Education,” he said, CNN reported. “We will drain the government education swamp and stop the abuse of your taxpayer dollars to indoctrinate America’s youth with all sorts of things that you don’t want to have our youth hearing.”

    First of all, neither Trump nor any of his loyal MAGA minions give a damn about students being “indoctrinated” as long as it’s the right kind of doctrine. Indoctrination, in their minds, only happens when kids are being taught about the spectrum of gender identities and sexual orientations that exist. To them, it’s indoctrination when students are taught that systemic racism is a thing in a country where Black people were barred from accessing the “American dream” through two and a half centuries of slavery and another century of legally sanctioned second-class citizenship.

    However, it wasn’t indoctrination in their minds when Louisiana officially became the first state in U.S. history to require by law that the Ten Commandments be displayed in every public school in the state from kindergarten through college. It wasn’t indoctrination when Florida education officials approved requirements to teach students that enslaved people benefited from slavery and that Black victims of race massacres also committed acts of violence. Those same officials selected PragerU — an unaccredited conservative non-profit organization founded by a loud and proud racist — to provide classroom materials to Florida schools. PragerU produced animated videos for children that taught, among other things, that Frederick Douglass, a slave-turned-abolitionist, would have agreed with America’s choice to prioritize white supremacy over ending slavery.

    Trump, however, hasn’t threatened Florida’s Board of Education with any kind of sanctions under his future presidency, because when he talks about indoctrination, he doesn’t mean white nationalist indoctrination, because that kind of propaganda is his political bread and butter.

    What Trump doesn’t seem to understand is that as much as he tries to distance himself from Project 2025 — the Heritage Foundation’s pro-fascism brainchild aimed at permanently MAGA-tizing the federal government once Trump is back in office — he can’t seem to stop saying the Project 2025 part out loud.

    One of the tenets of Project 2025 that opponents have highlighted the most is its intent to rid the country of its Department of Education.

    Speaking of which, recently, reporters for Hip Hop Hollywood spoke to Black men between the ages of 18-65 and had them read excerpts from the conservative plan for America and share their thoughts on camera. The interviews covered, among other things, the project’s impact on education should it ever be enacted.

    You can watch the video below. Spoiler alert: Black men weren’t feeling any of it.

    [ad_2]

    Zack Linly

    Source link

  • Judge puts Biden’s student loan cancellation on hold again

    Judge puts Biden’s student loan cancellation on hold again

    [ad_1]

    A federal judge in Missouri put a temporary hold on President Joe Biden’s latest student loan cancellation plan on Thursday, slamming the door on hope it would move forward after another judge allowed a pause to expire.Related video above: Delinquency reports for student loan borrowers restart in OctoberJust as it briefly appeared the Biden administration would have a window to push its plan forward, U.S. District Judge Matthew Schelp in Missouri granted an injunction blocking any widespread cancellation.Six Republican-led states requested the injunction hours earlier, after a federal judge in Georgia decided not to extend a separate order blocking the plan.The states, led by Missouri’s attorney general, asked Schelp to act fast, saying the Education Department could “unlawfully mass cancel up to hundreds of billions of dollars in student loans as soon as Monday.” Schelp called it an easy decision.Biden’s plan has been on hold since September, when the states filed a lawsuit in Georgia arguing Biden had overstepped his legal authority. But on Thursday, U.S. District Court Judge J. Randal Hall decided not to extend the pause after finding that Georgia doesn’t have the legal right to sue in this case.Hall dismissed Georgia from the case and transferred it to Missouri, which Hall said has “clear standing” to challenge Biden’s plan.Proponents of student loan cancellation briefly had a glimmer of hope the plan would move forward — Hall’s order was set to expire after Thursday, allowing the Education Department to finalize the rule. But Schelp’s order put the question to rest.“This is yet another win for the American people,” Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey said in a statement. “The Court rightfully recognized Joe Biden and Kamala Harris cannot saddle working Americans with Ivy League debt.”Biden’s plan would cancel at least some student loan debt for an estimated 30 million borrowers.It would erase up to $20,000 in interest for those who have seen their original balances increase because of runaway interest. It would also provide relief to those who have been repaying their loans for 20 or 25 years, and those who went to college programs that leave graduates with high debt compared to their incomes.Video below: Older Borrowers Struggle with High Student Loan DebtBiden told the Education Department to pursue cancellation through a federal rulemaking process after the Supreme Court rejected an earlier plan using a different legal justification. That plan would have eliminated up to $20,000 for 43 million Americans.The Supreme Court rejected Biden’s first proposal in a case brought by Republican states including Missouri.In his order Wednesday, Hall said Georgia failed to prove it was significantly harmed by Biden’s new plan. He rejected an argument that the policy would hurt the state’s income tax revenue, but he found that Missouri has a strong case.Missouri is suing on behalf of MOHELA, a student loan servicer that was created by the state and is hired by the federal government to help collect student loans. In the suit, Missouri argues that cancellation would hurt MOHELA’s revenue because it’s paid based on the number of borrowers it serves.In their lawsuit, the Republican states argue that the Education Department had quietly been telling loan servicers to prepare for loan cancellation as early as Sept. 9, bypassing a typical 60-day waiting period for new federal rules to take effect.Also joining the suit are Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, North Dakota and Ohio.

    WASHINGTON —

    A federal judge in Missouri put a temporary hold on President Joe Biden’s latest student loan cancellation plan on Thursday, slamming the door on hope it would move forward after another judge allowed a pause to expire.

    Related video above: Delinquency reports for student loan borrowers restart in October

    Just as it briefly appeared the Biden administration would have a window to push its plan forward, U.S. District Judge Matthew Schelp in Missouri granted an injunction blocking any widespread cancellation.

    Six Republican-led states requested the injunction hours earlier, after a federal judge in Georgia decided not to extend a separate order blocking the plan.

    The states, led by Missouri’s attorney general, asked Schelp to act fast, saying the Education Department could “unlawfully mass cancel up to hundreds of billions of dollars in student loans as soon as Monday.” Schelp called it an easy decision.

    Biden’s plan has been on hold since September, when the states filed a lawsuit in Georgia arguing Biden had overstepped his legal authority. But on Thursday, U.S. District Court Judge J. Randal Hall decided not to extend the pause after finding that Georgia doesn’t have the legal right to sue in this case.

    Hall dismissed Georgia from the case and transferred it to Missouri, which Hall said has “clear standing” to challenge Biden’s plan.

    Proponents of student loan cancellation briefly had a glimmer of hope the plan would move forward — Hall’s order was set to expire after Thursday, allowing the Education Department to finalize the rule. But Schelp’s order put the question to rest.

    “This is yet another win for the American people,” Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey said in a statement. “The Court rightfully recognized Joe Biden and Kamala Harris cannot saddle working Americans with Ivy League debt.”

    Biden’s plan would cancel at least some student loan debt for an estimated 30 million borrowers.

    It would erase up to $20,000 in interest for those who have seen their original balances increase because of runaway interest. It would also provide relief to those who have been repaying their loans for 20 or 25 years, and those who went to college programs that leave graduates with high debt compared to their incomes.

    Video below: Older Borrowers Struggle with High Student Loan Debt

    Biden told the Education Department to pursue cancellation through a federal rulemaking process after the Supreme Court rejected an earlier plan using a different legal justification. That plan would have eliminated up to $20,000 for 43 million Americans.

    The Supreme Court rejected Biden’s first proposal in a case brought by Republican states including Missouri.

    In his order Wednesday, Hall said Georgia failed to prove it was significantly harmed by Biden’s new plan. He rejected an argument that the policy would hurt the state’s income tax revenue, but he found that Missouri has a strong case.

    Missouri is suing on behalf of MOHELA, a student loan servicer that was created by the state and is hired by the federal government to help collect student loans. In the suit, Missouri argues that cancellation would hurt MOHELA’s revenue because it’s paid based on the number of borrowers it serves.

    In their lawsuit, the Republican states argue that the Education Department had quietly been telling loan servicers to prepare for loan cancellation as early as Sept. 9, bypassing a typical 60-day waiting period for new federal rules to take effect.

    Also joining the suit are Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, North Dakota and Ohio.

    [ad_2]

    Source link