On July 14th, a group of states and more than two dozen state attorneys general sued the Trump administration over billions of dollars in federal education funds it intended for English learning, teacher training, and other key school programs.

The lawsuit, headed by California, Colorado, Massachusetts and Rhode Island, comes in response to a decision by the Department of Education on June 30th, without little notice, froze nearly $7 billion in education funding, leaving school systems around the country scrambling to keep programs functioning just weeks before the start of a new school year.

The Trump administration illegally withheld, in an action commonly referred to as impoundment, federal education funds for five key K-12 programs that would have provided $6.2B in funding.

Why is this impoundment illegal?

Federal law states that the president may not temporarily or permanently withhold funds without submitting a “special message” that includes the funding amount, rationale, and budgetary effects of the proposal to freeze (or impound) those funds, and both the House and Senate need to approve it. Secretary McMahon’s email was three sentences long without any details. The plaintiffs contend the administration’s refusal to disperse the money violates several federal statutes and is an overreach of the president’s powers.

Why is impoundment a problem?

Funding decisions that rely on this money in school districts in all 50 states have already been made for the upcoming school year. District leaders who were planning to use these funds for summer school and after school programming, teacher training and hiring of support staff, and other programs that support student learning and wellbeing may have to make tough cuts or use their reserves in response if these federal funds are not released soon.

This is just another test case for how far the Trump administration is willing to go to end public education. This impoundment builds on the improper termination of contracts and grants such as the Supporting Effective Educator Development (SEED) and Teacher Quality Partnership (TQP) already made.

The $6.2 billion in formula funds that is being withheld represents about 6% of the $88 billion that the Department of Education spends for public schools. That may not seem like a lot, but it is enough funding to support nearly 90,000 educator positions across the country (assuming an average salary of $72,000).

While these decisions are being determined for all students across the country, for students of color, students from low-income backgrounds, and English learners, these decisions have the largest consequences.

What is the scope of the problem?

This impoundment will affect every state in the country. Some states stand to lose hundreds of millions of dollars. New America crunched the district-by-district numbers, and the results paint a dire picture. Here’s just a sampling:

• The average school district will lose almost a quarter-million dollars in funding ($220,289), but many will lose several million, and a few will be shortchanged by tens of millions.
• Districts serving high-poverty student populations (those where over 25% of children live in poverty) will lose over 5x as much funding per pupil as low-poverty school districts (those where fewer than 10% of children live in poverty).
• The average school district enrolling majority students of color will see 50% bigger cuts than the average majority-white school district.

What should state leaders do?

State Education Agencies (SEAs) play an important role in supporting districts with making decisions on spending over the next three months based on these federal actions to make sure they are prioritizing spending on the most immediate needs of students and families. Some states like Iowa, New Mexico, and Colorado have already provided guidance and support to help local education agencies (LEAs) make those decisions. SEAs can provide guidance and share information about LEAs’ financial situations to inform this process. State leaders should also advocate for, where appropriate, additional funding in upcoming legislative sessions to mitigate the effects of losing illegally withheld funds. They should also communicate the damaging impact of illegal withholding to their federal representatives where appropriate and ask them to support releasing these funds.

What should you do?

Advocates can take the following recourse to prompt their states to support their districts and schools with ensuring that programs that support student outcomes, particularly for their most vulnerable students, are maintained:

• Urge your state’s SEA to share as much information about financial situations with LEAs and help them make short-term decisions that align with the highest priorities.
• Find examples of LEAs and schools that have made cuts already to make the case for distributing these funds.
• If federal funds aren’t released, and funding cuts become inevitable, urge state leaders to implement budget cuts in ways that do the least harm to high-need districts.
• You can also reach out to your federal representatives and ask for their support in releasing the illegally withheld funds.

It is essential for states to prepare contingency plans now could help to mitigate disruption to essential programs that serve the students, educators, and families who depend on them.