President Donald Trump is gearing up to follow through on another campaign promise and gut the U.S. Department of Education (DOE). But what could dismantling the DOE actually look like?

The U.S. Supreme Court lifted a district court judge’s injunction Monday that had previously barred Trump and Education Secretary Linda McMahon from downsizing the DOE. McMahon had announced in March that the DOE would be slashing its workforce in half, following Trump’s directive to begin dismantling the agency prior to returning education to the states. “Today’s reduction in force reflects the Department of Education’s commitment to efficiency, accountability, and ensuring that resources are directed where they matter most: to students, parents, and teachers,” McMahon said at the time. She added, “This is a significant step toward restoring the greatness of the United States education system.”

Trump praised the Supreme Court’s Monday decision and pledged to continue his efforts to downsize the DOE. “The United States Supreme Court has handed a Major Victory to Parents and Students across the Country, by declaring the Trump Administration may proceed on returning the functions of the Department of Education BACK TO THE STATES,” Trump said in a Truth Social post. “The Federal Government has been running our Education System into the ground, but we are going to turn it all around by giving the Power back to the PEOPLE. America’s Students will be the best, brightest, and most Highly Educated anywhere in the World.”

McMahon also pledged to continue dismantling the DOE. “The U.S. Department of Education will now deliver on its mandate to restore excellence in American education. We will carry out the reduction in force to promote efficiency and accountability and to ensure resources are directed where they matter most — to students, parents, and teachers,” McMahon said in a statement. She added, “As we return education to the states, this Administration will continue to perform all statutory duties while empowering families and teachers by reducing education bureaucracy.”

In comments to The Washington Stand, Jeanne Allen, founder and CEO of the Center for Education Reform, said, “The latest SCOTUS decision is a green light for reducing the size and scope of unnecessary and counterproductive oversight of everything from programs to personnel.” She explained, “Great education happens most in environments with the least amount of interference from bureaucracy, and even with a comparably small investment of 10% of all education spending, the federal government’s negative impact on education at the school level is massive.” Allen added, “When they have freedom from top-down policy proclamations, states can enable more innovative solutions to support the education of America’s children while they are school age and beyond.”

Jonathan Butcher, acting director of the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Education Policy, explained to TWS what dismantling the DOE might look like in practical terms. “First, moving programs for children with special needs to the Department of Health and Human Services. The president and secretary are already working on this, according to social media,” Butcher began. He continued, “Second, moving civil rights back to the Department of Justice, which already has an office for civil rights. Third, moving adult education and family literacy programs to the Department of Labor via an inter-agency agreement. This is already happening and was just announced today.” Butcher went on, “Fourth, moving the student loan program to either the Small Business Administration or Treasury. This is a huge program, so there are various things that will need to change (for example, there is an office that oversees the interaction between loan servicers and students).” He added, “These are all things that are either underway or are being talked about.”

Patrick Wolf, professor of Education Policy at the University of Arkansas, told TWS, “There was fat to cut in the Department outside of the Institute of Education Sciences, particularly regarding ‘professional development’ programs for teachers and schools, many of which were either completely ineffective or infected with wokism, or both.” He continued, “There was even fat to cut within the Institute of Education Sciences, as the Comprehensive Centers and Regional Education Labs operated inefficiently, largely because bureaucrats in Washington frequently change their minds and redirect what those regional organizations do and how they do it.” He added, “The What Works Clearinghouse also was largely a waste of funds.”

However, Wolf warned that dismantling the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) could undermine national accountability standards and place a greater burden on individual states. “NCES, in contrast, is highly efficient in spite of being woefully understaffed,” he said, noting that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) “cut the deepest” in that division. “The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), ‘The Nation’s Report Card,’ will continue, but with some versions of the national test cancelled entirely and others limited to certain subjects. The NAEP is the most rigorous and objective measure of student achievement across the various states,” Wolf explained. He continued, “Limitations on this vital test will mean that we will know less about how well students in various states are mastering academic content.”