Connect with us

News

Trump to sign order aiming to close the Education Department

Published

on

Trump to sign order aiming to close the Education Department

Demonstrators gather outside of the offices of the U.S. Department of Education in Washington, D.C., on March 13 to protest against mass layoffs and budget cuts at the agency.

Bryan Dozier/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Bryan Dozier/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty

President Trump is expected to sign a long-expected executive action Thursday calling on U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon “to take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure [of] the Department of Education and return education authority to the States,” according to a fact sheet provided by the White House. Trump plans to sign the order at a ceremony alongside the Republican governors of Texas, Indiana, Florida and Ohio.

The move has been expected since early February, when the White House revealed its intentions but withheld the action until after McMahon’s Senate confirmation. It now arrives more than a week after the Trump administration has already begun sweeping layoffs at the Education Department.

According to the administration’s own numbers, Trump inherited a department with 4,133 employees. Nearly 600 workers have since chosen to leave, by resigning or retiring. And last week, 1,300 workers were told they would lose their jobs as part of a reduction-in-force. That leaves 2,183 staff at the department – roughly half the size it was just a few weeks ago.

Advertisement

USA Today was first to report news of Thursday’s signing.

Text of the executive order was not available Wednesday, but a draft, previously obtained by NPR, instructed McMahon to act “to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law,” an acknowledgement that the department and its signature responsibilities were created by Congress and cannot legally be altered without congressional approval. That would almost certainly require 60 votes in the U.S. Senate to overcome a Democratic filibuster.

Within hours of McMahon’s confirmation earlier this month, she shared a lengthy message with Education Department staff attempting to rally support for the department’s unwinding, calling it “our opportunity to perform one final, unforgettable public service to future generations of students.”

“What’s the end goal here? Destroying public education in America,” said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., in a statement. “The effects of Trump and [Trump advisor Elon] Musk’s slash and burn campaign will be felt across our state—by students and families who suffer from the loss of Department staff working to ensure their rights under federal law.”

In an NPR/PBS News/Marist poll taken in late February, 63% of Americans surveyed said they would oppose getting rid of the department, compared with 37% who supported its closure.

Advertisement

Blaming the department for lackluster student achievement

In a fact sheet provided to NPR, the White House justifies the department’s closure, claiming that, since its founding in 1979, the Department of Education has spent over $3 trillion without improving student achievement.

According to The Nation’s Report Card, one of the oldest and most reliable barometers of student achievement in the U.S., reading scores changed little between 1992 and 2019, though math achievement improved considerably. The pandemic also wrought havoc on student achievement, with many learning gaps remaining five years after schools first closed to in-person learning.

These “scores reveal a national crisis—our children are falling behind,” said White House Principal Deputy Press Secretary Harrison Fields in a statement to NPR. Trump’s order, Fields wrote, “will empower parents, states, and communities to take control and improve outcomes for all students.”

The draft order previously reviewed by NPR declared “the experiment of controlling American education through Federal programs and dollars … has failed our children.”

Federal dollars make up a small fraction of public schools’ funding – between 6% and 13%, according to a 2018 report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office. The overwhelming majority comes from states and local taxes. And those federal dollars are largely intended to help schools serve the nation’s most vulnerable students: those living in low-income communities, including millions of rural students, and children with disabilities.

Advertisement

At McMahon’s confirmation hearing, multiple senators asked whether the department’s dismantling would include cuts to these key, congressionally-required funding streams. McMahon assured them, “It is not the president’s goal to defund the programs. It was only to have it operate more efficiently.”

According to one senior administration official, the executive action will “ensure the effective and uninterrupted delivery of services, programs, and benefits on which Americans rely.”

The Education Department is prohibited by law from telling schools what, or how, to teach. Nor does it coordinate or control how states and districts handle even fundamental subjects, like math and reading.

Two rare success stories from the recent Nation’s Report Card – Alabama in math and Louisiana in reading – highlight just how much control states and local districts have over their educational destinies. After abysmal finishes in 2019 (Louisiana in 4th grade reading, Alabama in 4th grade math), both states implemented sweeping changes to help their districts improve – with a big assist from federal COVID relief funds. Both states showed remarkable improvement by 2024.

Advertisement

News

Former Olympian pleads not guilty in reflecting pool vandalism charges

Published

on

Former Olympian pleads not guilty in reflecting pool vandalism charges

Former U.S. Olympian David Hearn (left) walks with his attorney Norman Eisen to speak to reporters and protesters gathered after his arraignment at the Superior Court of the District of Columbia in Washington, D.C. on Thursday.

Finn Gomez/Getty Images


hide caption



toggle caption

Advertisement

Finn Gomez/Getty Images

Former U.S. Olympic canoeist David Hearn pleaded not guilty to damaging the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool in D.C. Superior Court Thursday morning.

Federal prosecutors charged Hearn with a single count of destruction of property causing more than $1,000 in damage to the pool.

Hearn has previously claimed, which his attorneys repeated during a short press conference outside the court, that he simply touched the water in the pool out of curiosity.

Advertisement

The Trump administration had just completed a $14 million renovation of the pool.

But shortly after the work finished, peeling paint and algae gathered in the water. The remodel has been largely criticized as a massive failure and waste of taxpayer dollars.

Superior Court Judge Carmen McLean released Hearn on his own recognizance. His next hearing is scheduled for Aug. 5.

Norm Eisen, one of Hearn’s attorneys, spoke to reporters outside of court following the hearing. He said the administration is using Hearn as a “scapegoat … for their own failures.”

“It is not a crime to touch the reflecting pool, to touch water in the United States of America,” he said.

Advertisement

Prosecutors say there is a host of evidence against Hearn.

This is a developing story.

Continue Reading

News

Three more people charged with damaging Reflecting Pool after Trump’s multimillion-dollar restoration | CNN Politics

Published

on

Three more people charged with damaging Reflecting Pool after Trump’s multimillion-dollar restoration | CNN Politics

Three more people have been criminally charged with destruction of property at the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.

Officers say they detained Cameron Thiers, Sophie Dennison-Gibby and Justin Carreno one Saturday afternoon in June and described in court documents witnessing them peeling and removing pieces of blue paint from the Reflecting Pool.

One officer “witnessed Carreno reach down into the reflecting pool and pull up a piece of the blue paint,” according to the court documents.

The officer who detained Dennison-Gibby “found 1 additional piece of the reflecting pool liner” in her purse, the documents said.

All three incidents were recorded on the officers’ body worn cameras, they said in the court documents.

Advertisement

Several “partnering law enforcement agencies assigned to the Reflecting Pool” working with US Park Police were involved in detaining the two men and one woman — including officers from Texas, Oklahoma, Montana and California.

One of the officers said in court documents that Thiers “admitted to removing a piece of blue sealant from the Reflecting Pool and still had it in his hand when I made contact with him.”

The three defendants were arraigned in court Wednesday and pleaded not guilty to the misdemeanor charges of destruction of property with a value less than $1,000. The judge ordered them to stay away from the Reflecting Pool.

Lawyers for Thiers and Dennison-Gibby declined to comment. CNN has reached out to Carreno’s attorney.

If found guilty of destruction of property, the defendants could be fined up to $1,000 and face a maximum of 180 days behind bars.

Advertisement

The New York Times first reported that three additional people had been charged with damaging the Reflecting Pool.

President Donald Trump has repeatedly claimed that vandals caused major damage to the pool by gashing the lining after his administration spent more than $14 million on renovations, though he has not provided evidence to support that claim. The officers who charged Carreno, Thiers and Dennison-Gibby did not accuse them of gashing the lining.

Former Olympic canoeist David Hearn was indicted by a grand jury in Washington, DC, last week for allegedly damaging the Reflecting Pool. Hearn — unlike Carreno, Thiers and Dennison-Gibby – was charged with destruction of property with a value of more than $1,000 which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison, if convicted. He is set to be arraigned in court Thursday.

Crews began draining the Reflecting Pool over the weekend to make repairs, according to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, for the second time in three months.

The move comes after weeks of problems – algae blooms, green-hued water, a chipping bottom and the administration’s allegations of vandalism – that have plagued the iconic landmark, making its woes the subject of national interest.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Supreme Court financial disclosures reveal how their books add to their income

Published

on

Supreme Court financial disclosures reveal how their books add to their income

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett speaks at the Reagan Library on Sept. 9, 2025, in Simi Valley, Calif. Barrett discussed and signed copies of her new book, Listening to the Law: Reflections on the Court and Constitution.

Mario Tama/Getty Images


hide caption



toggle caption

Advertisement

Mario Tama/Getty Images

Even as the Supreme Court was handing down one legal thunderbolt after another last week, the justices were quietly releasing their annual financial reports. Justice Samuel Alito was the only sitting justice to request an extension, which he has done for 15 years. The disclosures do not give a complete account of the justices’ total income and wealth, but they give insights into their concertgoing, guest professorships and even their involvement in youth sports.

In addition to their salaries, much of the justices’ reported income came from their book deals. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson led the pack earning more than $1.1 million last year for a total of roughly $4 million since her memoir, Lovely One, was published in 2024.

Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett and retired Justice Anthony Kennedy also reported income from published books. Earnings from their books ranged from $849,000 for Barrett, to $300,000 for Gorsuch and $88,000 for Sotomayor, whose books include her 2013 autobiography and five children’s books. Justice Clarence Thomas, who previously earned $1.5 million for his 2007 memoir, listed no publisher payments last year, and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, one of 13 co-authors of a 2016 legal treatise, also received no payments last year. Kavanaugh is said to be working on a memoir but he listed no payments for the anticipated book. Alito does have a book coming out in the fall, but with his financial report still outstanding, there is no data on how much he was paid for the work in 2025.

Advertisement

The only two sitting justices who have not written books are Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Elena Kagan.

Many justices also earned income from teaching at law schools. Roberts reported income from New England Law, located in Boston, and Gorsuch reported teaching income from George Mason University in Virginia. Thomas taught classes at Catholic University in Washington, D.C., and Barrett and Kavanaugh taught at Notre Dame Law School. Barrett graduated from the school and began teaching there 23 years ago; Kavanaugh has family connections to Notre Dame.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending