Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
The Trump administration has taken decisive action by filing an emergency appeal with the Supreme Court to secure permission for eliminating hundreds of millions of dollars in federal grants within the Education Department. This appeal is a critical aspect of the administration’s broader campaign against diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in educational funding.
In its appeal, the Justice Department is urging the Supreme Court to lift a nationwide injunction that currently prevents the termination of grants linked to two key federal programs—Teacher Quality Partnership and Supporting Effective Educator Development.
Earlier this month, U.S. District Judge Myong Joun issued a temporary restraining order ordering the restoration of these grants, essential for addressing teacher shortages, especially in rural and underserved areas. These grants, which amount to over $600 million, primarily support teacher preparation in areas such as mathematics, science, and special education.
Legal Challenges to Education Funding Cuts
A coalition of eight states, including California, has accused the Education Department, led by Linda McMahon, of unlawfully terminating these vital education grants. The states contend that these federal funds were crucial in developing effective curriculum and training more qualified teachers.
The Trump administration has vehemently criticized the injunction in its legal filing, arguing that the federal courts are overstepping their jurisdiction. Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris articulated concerns about the implications of a single district-court judge having the power to compel the federal government to disburse taxpayer funds without proper authority.
“This case exemplifies a flood of recent suits that raise the question: Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out millions in taxpayer dollars?” Harris wrote. The administration emphasizes that if lower federal courts can issue mandates like this, it could lead to significant financial implications for the federal budget.
Implications of the Supreme Court Appeal
The administration’s legal strategy positions this appeal as an
