Linda McMahon was narrowly confirmed along party lines as President Trump’s secretary of education in a 51-to-45 Senate vote late Monday afternoon and sworn in shortly after at the Department of Education building.
All eyes are now on the White House as educators, policy experts and advocates anxiously wait to see if Trump will sign a controversial but highly anticipated executive order to abolish the very department McMahon has been confirmed to lead.
The president and his allies have promoted the idea of dismantling the 45-year-old agency since the early days of his campaign for a second term, saying the department has grown too big and interferes in matters best left to local and state authorities.
But the idea isn’t entirely new, nor would it be easy to implement. It would require legislative support, as the department’s existence is written into statute. Shuttering it would require a majority vote in both houses of Congress.
“We can expect there to be a bit of a panic when the order comes out,” Emmanual Guillory, senior director of government relations at the American Council on Education, told Inside Higher Ed.
It remains unclear to observers what mechanisms the Trump administration would use to close the department, however.
“This will all depend on what dismantling the department truly means,” Guillory said. “I believe that the executive order would be somewhat broad, like we’ve seen [in the case of the diversity, equity and inclusion orders], and it will give the department the opportunity to refine the details.”
Still, Trump has continued to promote the concept, and red states across the country have backed it. Chatter about the executive order began circling just days after he took office in January, and the plans were confirmed by multiple news sources in early February, though specifics were still unclear.
Since the plans were leaked, Trump himself has publicly confirmed his intention to dismantle the department, although he did not disclose specific details on how he would do so.
Guillory believes that much like when Republicans have tried to get rid of the department in the past, they will lack the congressional votes needed to officially do so. But Trump could keep the skeleton of the department and move its core functions elsewhere, he said.
“Our thinking, because we’ve seen this before, is that likely a lot of the functionality of the department would get placed at other agencies, but we would be curious as to what functions would be terminated entirely,” he said. “That would cause the most concern for our members … Will those things simply be moved to another agency, or will some of those things not?”
There are certain functions that are protected by the Higher Education Act of 1965, Guillory said. “The department legally would not necessarily be able to just terminate student aid programs, for example.” But he still worries the transition of oversight from one department to another may not be seamless.
Shortly before the vote began on Monday, the Senate minority leader, Chuck Schumer of New York, made the Democrats’ stance on McMahon’s nomination clear.
“Before colleagues vote on Linda McMahon’s nomination for secretary of education, they should remember a vote for Mrs. McMahon is a vote for draconian cuts to education … That’s why I am so proud that every Democrat will vote no,” he said.
Other democratic lawmakers warned during floor comments on Thursday that McMahon’s confirmation, and the major department-level changes she’s backed, could risk the future of the department.
Senator Gary Peters of Michigan said the country needs a secretary of education “who values and respects public education.”
“Instead of working to protect funding,” he said, “she’s blatantly supported efforts to dismantle our education system.”
For more background on what senators have said about McMahon, check out Inside Higher Ed’s live blog from her confirmation hearing, or read the five key takeaways.
Senator Alex Padilla of California noted the cuts that have already been made to more than 100 departmental research contracts and countless nonpartisan career staff members.
“They’re making it clear that this is just the beginning,” he said. “We could talk about Linda McMahon’s qualifications, or frankly lack thereof, but I’m not shocked, because President Trump isn’t looking for someone with the background or commitment to public education in America. He’s looking for someone to destroy it.”
Although no Republicans commented Thursday, they voted unanimously to confirm McMahon in Monday’s vote (Republican senators Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia and Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming were not present for the vote. Two Democrats were also absent). The majority leader, Senator John Thune of South Dakota, spoke in support of McMahon before the final confirmation.
“Mrs. McMahon is an accomplished businesswoman and public servant,” he said. “I’m glad that Mrs. McMahon plans to work in a way that empowers those closest to the student, because they are in the best position to do what’s right for that student … I look forward to working with Mrs. McMahon to limit bureaucracy, empower state governments and let good teachers do what they’re best at.”
Top Agenda Items
Guillory expects McMahon to pick up accreditation policies as one of the first issues up for discussion.
He also is expecting the new secretary to prioritize rethinking and potentially amending the financial value transparency and gainful-employment rule, a policy initiated by the Biden administration to better hold higher ed institutions accountable for students’ outcomes. A lawsuit was filed against the regulation in 2023, but federal judgment has been put on pause to allow the new administration’s Education Department to determine its position on the policy.
It still remains unclear whether Trump will try to protect the gainful-employment rule or repeal it and drop the case, but Guillory has been encouraged by the line of communication between the department and higher ed leaders on the topic.
“They’ve been really good about listening to and hearing from our members directly on some of the issues that they’ve experienced while they were reporting [financial transparency data] and they are really trying to get feedback on how can we make this better,” he said.
Other topics of focus for McMahon will likely include expanded details on Trump’s enforcement of Title IX; his diversity, equity and inclusion orders; and the freeze of applications to income-driven repayment plans for student loans, Guillory said.
