In a decisive move that underscores the balance of power between branches of government, a federal judge has blocked the Trump administration’s controversial plan to drastically reduce the U.S. Department of Education’s workforce. The decision, handed down by U.S. District Judge Myong Joun in Boston, requires the government to reinstate over 1,300 employees who were slated to be laid off. The judge’s ruling reflects deep concerns that the mass terminations were a thinly veiled attempt to effectively dismantle the department — a move for which the administration had no legal authority.

Judge Joun, who was appointed by President Joe Biden, made it clear in his written opinion that the administration’s actions were not merely a restructuring effort, but a deliberate strategy to gut the federal education agency without legislative approval. He emphasized that the government’s justification lacked credibility and noted that the layoffs would have reduced the department’s workforce by nearly 50% — a drastic and unprecedented step. His ruling halted the implementation of this “reduction in force,” asserting that such an action cannot proceed without appropriate legal authorization.

The legal challenge to the layoffs was brought by a coalition of Democratic attorneys general representing 20 states and the District of Columbia. They were joined by several public school districts and teachers' unions, all of whom argued that the administration’s plan would do irreparable harm to public education infrastructure. The plaintiffs contended that the layoffs would severely hinder federal oversight, reduce essential educational support programs, and disrupt the enforcement of student rights and protections.

At the center of the controversy was an announcement made on March 11 by Secretary of Education Linda McMahon. Her department labeled the layoffs as a strategic move aligned with what they called the agency’s “final mission.” However, this announcement came just days before former President Trump signed an executive order formally initiating plans to shut down the Education Department altogether. This order fulfilled a long-standing campaign promise to shift educational authority from the federal level to state and local governments.

Critics of the administration’s plan viewed the timing of the layoffs and the executive order as evidence of a coordinated effort to undermine federal involvement in education policy. They argued that dismantling the department without Congressional input bypassed democratic processes and endangered programs that rely on federal oversight, such as Title I funding, student loan protections, and disability services in schools.

The Education Department has not yet issued an official response to the judge’s ruling. However, the decision marks a significant legal and political setback for those pushing to decentralize federal education policy. It reinforces the role of the judiciary in upholding statutory checks on executive power and affirms that major structural changes to federal agencies must follow due legal process and democratic norms.