Editorial
President Donald Trump’s proposed fiscal year 2026 budget may look like a simple funding realignment on paper, but in reality, it dismantles decades of hard-won civil rights protections for students with disabilities, English language learners, and other historically underserved groups.
In 2016, Gov Tom Wolf of Pennsylvania made work experience for high school students with disabilities a priority. Not all states would do the same today. (Governor Tom Wolf via Flickr/Creative Commons)Framed as a “streamlining” effort, the budget consolidates 18 separate K–12 education programs, including afterschool programs, mental health initiatives, and support for marginalized students, into a single block grant. It also rolls seven distinct federal IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) programs into a single “simplified” funding stream. But let’s be clear: simplifying funding means removing the accountability that once ensured states used these funds as Congress intended: for students protected under federal law.
Proponents of a plan like this argue that it returns decision-making power to the states, allowing local leaders to allocate resources in ways that best meet the unique needs of their communities. In theory, this could offer greater flexibility and innovation. But in practice, without federal requirements or oversight, there is no guarantee that vulnerable student populations, such as students with disabilities or English learners, will remain a priority. Civil rights protections aren’t just red tape; they exist because history has shown that without them, inequities widen, not shrink.
States would no longer be required to earmark funds for students with disabilities, English learners, or students of color. They wouldn’t even need to report how they serve these students or face consequences if they didn’t. In essence, civil rights enforcement would be replaced by state discretion, with no requirement to meet federal equity standards. Yes, the money might still exist, but the rules are gone.
And the real danger doesn’t end there.
Buried in the fine print is this: Federal IDEA funding could be revoked from districts that fail to comply with the Trump administration’s definition of “parental rights.” That definition, based on precedent from red-state laws and executive orders, includes bans on gender-affirming policies, inclusive curriculum, trauma-informed instruction, and anything aligned with diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). In other words, schools that support inclusion could now risk losing special education funding.
Meanwhile, the Office for Civil Rights, which investigates IDEA violations, is facing a 35% budget cut. This comes after already shuttering 7 of its 12 regional offices. If students with disabilities are denied services, there may be no one left to investigate.
The budget doesn’t stop there. It eliminates GEAR UP, a federal program that supports college readiness for low-income students, and slashes $890 million from English Language Acquisition funding. An executive order declaring English the nation’s official language is being used to justify dismantling the federal office responsible for supporting multilingual learners. Entire teams have been laid off. Entire student populations are being written out of policy.
And here’s how they’re doing it: not through legislation, but through budget reconciliation. This is a “fast-track” process that bypasses the Senate filibuster and requires only 51 votes. Senator Mike Rounds (R–SD) said the quiet part out loud last year when he introduced a bill to abolish the Department of Education. He admitted that the real plan wasn’t to pass the bill, but to hollow out the department from the inside by redistributing its responsibilities, functionally erasing federal education protections without a single up-or-down vote on civil rights.
This isn’t theoretical. In states that have already banned DEI, targeted trans students, or ignored IEP timelines, this budget would remove the last line of defense. Students who need the most support will have no legal backup if states decide they no longer “need” those programs.
While this is currently just a budget proposal, if enacted, it will almost certainly face legal challenges, particularly under the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. Civil rights laws exist to prevent states from discriminating against students on the basis of disability, language status, race, or national origin. If states use this newfound flexibility to deny services to protected student groups, advocates could argue that the policy creates unequal access to public education. Courts have long recognized education as a critical function of government, and stripping targeted groups of support, especially when done systematically, may be seen as a violation of their constitutional rights. These legal battles won’t be easy, but they are coming.
So what can you do?
First, tell everyone. Most people don’t know this is happening, although opposing the administration and Congress these days feels a little like trying to stop a moving freight train, with most changes buried deep in policy language and bureaucratic documents. Then take action. Contact your representatives in Congress. Ask your local school board members how this budget could impact your district. Join advocacy coalitions and parent groups. Document everything: changes in services, denials, delays, language shifts. Create a paper trail.
You can also support organizations that are ready to fight back: the ACLU, the Education Law Center, Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, NEA, AFT, and others. These groups will be essential in bringing legal challenges and keeping the public informed.
You don’t have to do everything. But we all have to do something. This budget doesn’t just threaten programs; it threatens people. It threatens students, and we need to say so, loudly and without apology.
