Introduction

     Yet another ambitious plan that makes great headlines but has little merit is the White House suggestion to abolish, dissolve, dismantle the Federal Department of Education. It’s not only connected to the campaign to dislodge diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) from the curriculum, but is directed at critical theory, which has recently created its own critical theory through ignorance not just of content, but intent as well. 

This report will address the basics of the plan without making too many judgements on the intent but will reveal a rather shadowy attempt to undermine the reasons the department is here in the first place, one of which is civil rights. It will begin with the Denver Public School System’s lawsuit to protect classrooms from raids by immigration sweeps.

(Image credit: Liberty Bell Visitor Guide | The Constitutional Walking Tour of Philadelphia)

Methodology

     The same format as previous will be used: a.] a social media post where applicable (not included here); b.] Capsules containing the artificial intelligence query enclosed in (Begin Perplexity) and (End Perplexity-A) with the link included; c.] Notes to evaluate, clarify, refute, confirm and determine the authorial intent of the AI; d.] Congressional Record; e.] Media related to the recovery process contained in the narrative.

Capsules

(Begin Perplexity-AI)

denver public schools lawsuit against dhs

Denver Public Schools (DPS) filed a federal lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on February 13, 2025, challenging the Trump administration’s new policy allowing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents to conduct operations in schools123. This lawsuit is believed to be the first of its kind from a school system against this policy1.

The lawsuit aims to:

1. Undo the Trump administration’s January 21, 2025 decision to allow immigration enforcement actions at “sensitive” locations, including schools1.

2. Obtain a temporary restraining order to prohibit ICE and Customs and Border Protection from enforcing the policy15.

Key points of the lawsuit:

• DPS argues that the policy has forced schools to divert vital educational resources and caused attendance to plummet23.

• The district claims that school attendance has dropped “noticeably” across all schools, particularly in those with “new-to-country families and where ICE raids have already occurred”1.

• DPS alleges that the policy is hindering its ability to provide education and life services to children who aren’t attending school out of fear13.

• The lawsuit contends that the Trump administration hasn’t provided a “good reason” for rescinding the previous rules or adequately considered the fallout2.

DPS, which serves over 90,000 students, including approximately 4,000 immigrants, has had to invest considerable time and resources in establishing protocols to safeguard students and training staff to handle potential immigration enforcement situations34.

The lawsuit also requests that DHS publish the directive publicly, as the lack of access to this information has impeded the district’s ability to prepare for the policy shift24.

This legal action comes amid other challenges to the policy, including lawsuits filed by religious groups alleging infringement upon their congregations’ religious freedoms1

https://www.perplexity.ai/search/denver-public-schools-lawsuit-4otcWzSjSI.zDIVf.kcITQ

why does the white house want to abolish the department of education

The White House, under President Donald Trump, wants to abolish the Department of Education for several reasons:

1. To combat perceived “wokeness”: Trump and his supporters argue that the department promotes a “radical woke agenda” that prioritizes identity politics over conservative viewpoints39. They specifically target:

   • Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives

   • Critical race theory

   • Policies supporting transgender students’ rights

2. To reduce federal government size and spending: Abolishing the department aligns with the conservative goal of shrinking the federal government’s role in education35.

3. To promote school choice: Trump supporters advocate for expanding options for families to choose between public, private, or religious schools49.

4. To transfer control to states and local school boards: The administration believes that education decisions should be made at the state and local levels rather than by the federal government45.

5. To address perceived ineffectiveness: Some conservatives argue that the Department of Education is an ineffective bureaucracy that has not improved educational outcomes since its creation5.

It’s important to note that while Trump has expressed his intention to abolish the department, he cannot do so unilaterally. Eliminating a federal agency requires an act of Congress, which would likely face significant opposition158

https://www.perplexity.ai/search/why-does-the-white-house-want-WY1UOlGESECii8OyzjGAWw

what were past reasons for abolishing department of education

Past reasons for abolishing the Department of Education have been varied and persistent since its creation. These reasons include:

1. Fiscal concerns: Critics argued that the department was too expensive and unnecessary15.

2. Constitutional objections: Some viewed the department as an unconstitutional use of federal authority, believing education should be managed at the state level15.

3. Size and scope: Opponents claimed the department was too big and represented excessive federal involvement in education1.

4. Ideological opposition: In the 1980s, Ronald Reagan saw federal involvement in education as an engine of affirmative action and opposed what he called “forced busing” to achieve racial integration in schools1.

5. States’ rights: There was a belief that education should be primarily controlled by individual states rather than the federal government5.

6. Efficiency: Some argued that the department’s functions could be more effectively managed by other agencies or state governments2.

7. Historical precedent: The first iteration of the Department of Education, created in 1867, was demoted to an office within a year due to similar concerns about federal control over education1.

8. Political ideology: Abolishing the department has been part of conservative Republican orthodoxy since 1980, when Ronald Reagan campaigned on the promise to close it1.

These reasons have persisted over time, with current efforts to dismantle the department often echoing similar arguments from the past125

https://www.perplexity.ai/search/what-were-past-reasons-for-abo-2BofOfTbSWu1kymEgjISgQ

department of education role in segregation

The Department of Education, particularly through its Office for Civil Rights (OCR), plays a significant role in addressing and combating segregation in schools. The OCR is responsible for enforcing federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, disability, and age in educational institutions2.

Historically, the federal government has been instrumental in promoting school integration:

1. Following the landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954, which ruled that segregation in public schools was unconstitutional, the federal government worked to implement desegregation38.

2. In the 1960s and 1970s, the OCR filed hundreds of administrative proceedings against segregated school districts and cut off funding to schools that failed to comply with desegregation orders2.

3. The Department of Education has issued guidance to help districts achieve diversity and avoid racial isolation in ways consistent with existing law1.

However, in recent decades, the federal government’s efforts to integrate schools have faced challenges:

1. Legal restrictions have hampered integration efforts, leading to a tripling of intensely concentrated minority schools over the past 30 years2.

2. Only 8% of OCR’s substantive resolutions since 2013 have addressed racial discrimination, indicating a shift in focus2.

To address ongoing segregation issues, experts suggest that the Department of Education should:

1. Collaborate with other federal and state agencies to establish technical assistance teams and grant programs designed to reduce racial segregation and close opportunity gaps2.

2. Work with Congress to explore legal avenues to increase the ability of the Departments of Education and Justice to eliminate racial segregation and race-based educational disparities2.

3. Continue to enforce civil rights laws and provide guidance to schools on how to promote diversity and avoid racial isolation within the bounds of current law1

4. https://www.perplexity.ai/search/department-of-education-role-i-3MSwzpFSSWemiqseOSblZQ

chances abolishing dept of education would pass congress

The chances of abolishing the Department of Education passing Congress are currently low. Several factors contribute to this assessment:

1. Lack of sufficient votes: To pass in the Senate, a bill would require 60 votes to overcome a filibuster1. This means at least seven Democrats would need to support the bill, which is considered highly unlikely15.

2. Previous failed attempts: A vote last year to abolish the education department failed to pass, with 60 Republicans joining all Democrats in opposing it5.

3. Bipartisan support for the department: Many parents, especially in rural Republican-dominated areas, have historically supported the Education Department, influencing representatives’ decisions4.

4. Complexity of the process: Dismantling the Department of Education would be a complex process involving significant legal, political, and practical challenges3. Many of the department’s offices were established by statute and can only be eliminated through an act of Congress1.

5. Republican skepticism: Some Republican lawmakers may oppose the department’s dissolution, as it would prevent them from pursuing certain objectives, such as implementing a deregulatory agenda7.

While the idea of abolishing the Department of Education has gained traction with the Trump administration, the legislative hurdles and lack of broad support make it unlikely to pass Congress in the near future46

https://www.perplexity.ai/search/chances-abolishing-dept-of-edu-PZq9kcQbRsWQHBRrhnyRaQ

abolishing the department of education is a taliban style ideology

The comparison between abolishing the U.S. Department of Education and Taliban-style ideology is inaccurate and misleading. While there are calls to eliminate the Department of Education in the United States, the motivations and potential outcomes are fundamentally different from the Taliban’s approach to education in Afghanistan.

In the U.S., proposals to abolish the Department of Education are primarily driven by political and ideological disagreements over the federal government’s role in education47. Supporters argue for transferring authority back to individual states and reducing federal involvement in educational matters4. This does not equate to eliminating education or imposing a single ideological viewpoint.

In contrast, the Taliban’s approach to education in Afghanistan involves:

1. Banning girls from attending high school5

2. Imposing gender segregation and strict dress codes5

3. Removing subjects like art, civil education, and culture2

4. Eliminating content on human rights, women’s rights, and democracy2

5. Adding religious material that justifies violence against dissenters2

6. Converting secular schools into religious madrasahs5

These actions aim to reshape Afghanistan’s education system to align with the Taliban’s extremist religious ideology, severely restricting educational opportunities and content3.

While there are valid debates about the role of the U.S. Department of Education, proposals to abolish it do not seek to eliminate education or impose a single religious ideology. The comparison to Taliban-style ideology is therefore unfounded and mischaracterizes the nature of the debate in the United States.

https://www.perplexity.ai/search/abolishing-the-department-of-e-AaXIb2rgQBmiSz0HK_4QMA

create a scenario where abolishing the department of education could lead to a taliban like culture

The abolition of the U.S. Department of Education could potentially lead to a scenario with some similarities to the Taliban’s approach to education, though it’s important to note that the contexts are vastly different. Here’s a hypothetical scenario:

Decentralization and Ideological Difference

With the Department of Education dismantled, education policy would be fully decentralized to state and local levels13. In some regions, this could lead to:

1. Increased religious influence in curriculum design, similar to the Taliban’s emphasis on religious education2.

2. Removal of subjects like art, civil education, and culture from curricula2.

3. Elimination of content related to human rights, women’s rights, and democracy2.

Erosion of Civil Rights Protections

The dissolution of the Office for Civil Rights could weaken protections against discrimination:

1. Reduced oversight on issues of race, gender, and disability in schools35.

2. Potential for increased gender segregation in education, echoing Taliban policies24.

Funding and Access Issues

The loss of federal oversight and funding could result in:

1. Significant reduction in resources for low-income students and those with disabilities35.

2. Potential closure of schools in underserved areas, limiting access to education13.

Curriculum changes

Some areas might implement curriculum changes reminiscent of Taliban policies:

1. Increased focus on religious studies at the expense of other subjects2.

2. Removal of images of living beings from textbooks2.

3. Introduction of content that aligns with specific ideological views2.

While this scenario is extreme and unlikely in the U.S. context, it illustrates how the absence of federal oversight in education could potentially lead to localized policies that restrict educational content and access, particularly for vulnerable populations35

https://www.perplexity.ai/search/create-a-scenario-where-abolis-yA_aorJySi.muE2E9oGy.Q

(End Perplexity-AI)

Notes

     Any number of scenarios might result in dissolving the Department of Education and many of the states with individual agendas would readily welcome the opportunity. That’s exactly the reason the system needs to remain in place. 

     (Summary: Franz Boas, https://www.perplexity.ai/search/franz-boas-on-the-importance-o-mqXWQ5jXSdO7DUgQ193uyg)

Afterword

     In fact, the very objective of dissolution of the Department of Education, under the guise of DEI gone wild, is multiculturalism, the outdated and dangerous concept of American exceptionalism, the very reason the pilgrims were shipped out of England in the mid-1600s.

     It’s also a shock that sociologists and anthropologists have sounded the bugle on this absurd possibility, cultures thrive on diversity and has been a mainstay of freedom in the democratic world. When schools are separated according to individual agendas, a high school graduate from Colorado who might want to attend UC would be rejected because of lack of acceptable credits to transfer.

     Still, the bottom line is segregation, the objective of the ruling class, where class structure is what it’s all about. That can’t happen with diversity.