Ten years ago this month, I was walking the halls of Congress, as part of EdTrust’s team, fighting for the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). I truly believed in what ESSA represented: a way to keep the federal government focused on students’ civil rights while giving states the flexibility to design their own systems — provided that states designed those systems to be grounded in honest data, meaningful standards, and real attention to how all groups of students were being served.

ESSA wasn’t perfect, but it struck a balance the country needed. It recognized that local communities understand their students and schools best, while also acknowledging a key truth: without federal guardrails, too many students — particularly Black and Latino students and those from low-income backgrounds — had long been denied resources and opportunities, and faced low expectations because of who they are or where they live.

This is exactly why ESSA kept the federal government involved. States could create their systems, but the nation still has a duty to make sure that no group of students was ignored or pushed aside, whether due to race, income, language, disability, or geography

Those guardrails grew from hard lessons. The first Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in 1965 aimed to protect students’ civil rights and direct federal funding to the communities with the greatest needs. However, ESEA didn’t require states to show whether federal dollars were actually making a difference for the students they were intended to support. No Child Left Behind changed that in the early 2000s, by insisting on transparent, disaggregated data and making clear that all children should have the opportunity and resources to reach their fullest potential. ESSA kept that level of honesty while giving states more flexibility in how they met expectations — but not whether they met them. It upheld a simple principle: every student deserves a real chance to learn, and the federal government has a role in making sure that happens.

Now, as we mark ESSA’s 10-year anniversary, that principle is being tested. This administration aims to weaken or dismantle the federal role in education entirely. President Trump and Education Secretary McMahon say it’s returning authority “back to the states.” But beneath the surface, it signals something different: the federal government no longer wants responsibility for what happens to students in public schools.

We’re told to simply trust states, but history and experience show that state leaders vary widely in what they believe students should learn, what access they should have, and how much they are willing to invest in public schools. These differences shape whether students are challenged, supported, and prepared for the world they will enter as adults.

This is exactly why ESSA kept the federal government involved. States could create their systems, but the nation still has a duty to make sure that no group of students was ignored or pushed aside, whether due to race, income, language, disability, or geography.

As the federal role in education weakens, that duty becomes blurred. Moving oversight of elementary and secondary education to the Department of Labor — which doesn’t have the requisite knowledge or expertise in education — shows that the administration is more concerned about the future workforce than about student learning. And when protections are not enforced and vary state by state, the risk increases that many students, especially those already facing the greatest obstacles, will have fewer opportunities in the future.

One decade later, the main question isn’t whether ESSA got everything right. There’s clearly ways to improve the law, like making assessments more relevant and helping struggling schools improve. And increased state flexibility hasn’t shown improved outcomes for students. The question is whether we still believe the federal government should help ensure that every student is truly ready for life after high school, regardless of their background or what they need to succeed.

If we walk away from that commitment, we’re walking away from the future we say we want for all our nation’s children.