外刊精读259:川普撤销教育部,是打打嘴炮还是真枪实干?(选自纽约时报)

外刊精读259:川普撤销教育部,是打打嘴炮还是真枪实干?(选自纽约时报)

9分钟 ·
播放数335
·
评论数0

Trump Signs Order Aimed at Eliminating Education Dept. ‘Once and for All’
Congress and federal law stand in the way of shutting down the agency, which manages federal loans for college, tracks student achievement and supports programs for students with disabilities.

March 20, 2025, The New York Times

🌟完整外刊原文,请加V: HLSHW666 进学习群免费获取

President Trump on Thursday instructed Education Secretary Linda McMahon to begin shutting down her agency, a task that cannot be completed without congressional approval and sets the stage for a seismic political and legal battle over the federal government’s role in the nation’s schools.

Surrounded by schoolchildren seated at desks in the East Room of the White House, Mr. Trump signed a long-awaited executive order that he said would begin dismantling the department “once and for all.” The Trump administration has cited poor test scores as a key justification for the move.

“We’re going to shut it down, and shut it down as quickly as possible,” Mr. Trump said.

The department, which manages federal loans for college, tracks student achievement and supports programs for students with disabilities, was created by an act of Congress. That means, according to Article I of the Constitution, that only Congress can shut it down. That clear delineation of power, a fundamental component of democracy from the inception of the United States, underscores why no other modern president has tried to unilaterally shutter a federal department.

But Mr. Trump has already taken significant steps that have limited the agency’s operations and authority. Since Mr. Trump’s inauguration, his administration has slashed the department’s work force by more than half and eliminated $600 million in grants. The job cuts hit particularly hard at the department’s Office for Civil Rights, which enforces the country’s guarantee that all students have an equal opportunity to an education.
Mr. Trump’s order contains potentially contradictory guidance for Ms. McMahon. On the one hand, the order directs her to facilitate the elimination of the agency. On the other, she is also mandated to rigorously comply with federal law. The order offers no guidance on how to square those two points.