America's post-Department of Education landscape: What would it look like?

It's a joyous time for Tina Descovich, co-founder of the conservative parents' rights group Moms for Liberty.

On the day after the Trump administration laid off nearly half of the U.S. Department of Education's staff, Descovich applauded President Donald Trump and Education Secretary Linda McMahon for following up on the promise they made on the presidential campaign trail: Transfer education oversight from the federal government to the states. Trump is expected to sign an executive order attempting to close the Education Department soon.

"If the question is about layoffs, it’s never a time to celebrate when people lose their jobs, but if the question is about the reduction of half a billion dollars at the Education Department and the streamlining of the Education Department, I'm very happy about that," said Descovich, who has four adult children and a 17-year-old child who attends a public high school.

With Moms for Liberty, Descovich has championed parents' rights and state-funded school vouchers for more than four years. The group, which has 320 chapters in 48 states, has advocated for school vouchers, book bans, and other conservative education ideologies that align with the Trump administration. (Editor’s note: Moms For Liberty says it does not advocate for book bans. Instead, it says that “they focus on promoting transparency for parents regarding age-appropriate content in schools and advocating for a fair review process for school materials.”)

The recent reductions at the agency are a win for her and U.S. parents and advocates who want education oversight to return to a more local level than at the federal government.

For others, confusion about what the cuts will mean for schools immediately and in the long-term lingers. Many Americans have taken to social media to ponder what a democratic country looks like without a federal agency at the helm of education.

Angered parents, teachers and education leaders who expected Trump to follow through on his promise to close the Education Department – which was outlined in Project 2025 – have said that public schools need all the help they can get. They argue any reduction in staffing at the department or in resources campuses receive will hurt students.

Angelica Solis, the chief policy officer of Education Leaders of Color, a network working to ensure young people of color have the opportunities to thrive, has two children, 7 and 9, who attend public schools. One of them benefits from special education services.

"Downsizing the ED will lead to inefficiencies and lack of oversight that jeopardize programs critical to student success in school and in life," she wrote in a letter to members of the network of education leaders.

Solis pointed to programs that could be affected by a reduction in staffing, including the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, or FAFSA, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act for students with special needs and Title I funding relied on by kids who live in poverty.

It remains unclear exactly how these programs at the nation's schools will be affected by the recent staffing reductions. But many of the department's obligations to support students, including those with disabilities and who are attend low-income schools, are protected by federal law.

For 45 years, the U.S. Department of Education has been tasked with conducting national education research, overseeing and investigating civil rights complaints in schools and supporting states with funding for the nation's most vulnerable students, including students with disabilities and kids living in poverty.

At the White House on Wednesday, Trump reiterated that he wants to dissolve the department and move some of its obligations to other federal agencies.

He defended the workforce reductions and budget cuts at the Education Department.

"We're going to move education into the states, so that the states — instead of bureaucrats working in Washington — can run education," Trump said to reporters during a bilateral meeting with Ireland Prime Minister Michael Martin. Congress would ultimately need to approve a closure of the Education Department.

Supports and funding cuts for vulnerable students, teachers are at the heart of concerns

The Trump administration's move is especially worrisome for parents who have kids with disabilities and those who live in rural or impoverished areas, said Katie Paris, a mom of two young kids in Ohio public schools and the founder of parents group Red Wine and Blue. Many of those kids only have access to their local public schools.

Forty moms called into a Red Wine and Blue group chat to discuss the potential ramifications of the layoffs on the Education Department Wednesday morning. Some of the women have spouses who recently lost their jobs in the mass federal workforce reductions. Many of them are now focused on organizing locally, Paris said.

"Today's meeting was really somber, but it was filled with a lot of gumption," Paris said. "There’s a real opportunity people are going to learn how essential the education department is to access public schools if it's gone."

North Carolina resident Stacy Staggs, who is a mom of 11-year-old twin daughters who both have different but advanced disabilities, said she's had to fight constantly to get her daughters the care they need and deserve in school.

Her only hope for her daughters is to rely on the public education system. The private schools she's applied for won't accept her daughters given their intense level of need of care, she said.

She's grateful for federal protections like the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, which allow her to advocate on behalf of her daughters to get the education the need in the public school system

But she worries about what could happen to resources for students with disabilities with the workforce reductions at the Education Department.

"When I hear things are rolling back in direction, I think about how my children and everybody’s children deserve more than what’s currently available," Staggs said.

Daniel Pearson, an executive director of nonprofit organization Educators for Excellence, fears that if schools are no longer required to use the funding they receive from the federal government to support vulnerable students, the money will be poorly spent.

There's also a real concern that states and school districts could underestimate or overestimate their budgets for the upcoming school years if they are unsure how much money they will receive from the federal government to support students and stipulations on those funds, Pearson said.

Many states, including Connecticut where he lives, are already strapped for cash.

The nation's teachers – especially those who teach students with disabilities – are already overworked and any reductions to the resources they receive now would be "more pressure onto a system that is losing teachers every day," he said.

Pearson and others have said they are also concerned about who will handle and investigate civil rights complaints if the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights goes on without adequate staffing or the Education Department is disbanded.

Questions linger about how staffing reduction, potential closure would affect student academic performance

Trump has said one of the primary reasons he wants to close the Education Department is that U.S. students are not performing well on national tests.

On Wednesday, Trump cited the department's own data which shows the U.S. falls behind countries like China, Denmark, Norway and Sweden in reading and math achievement.

Descovich backed Trump's argument in an interview with USA TODAY.

"Ultimately, the big picture is test scores are going down. Scores have declined obviously since COVID, have not recouped and are on a downward trajectory," she said. "It's one of the reasons the Education Department was created – to close the achievement gap. If you really want to look at it from a high picture, it hasn't been successful."

Briggs, on the other hand, argues that since most states already provide schools with most of their funding and control school curriculum, "this is not going to produce higher test scores."

"It's just going to make it harder for kids to succeed," she said.

(This story was updated to add new information.)

Contact Kayla Jimenez at kjimenez@usatoday.com. Follow her on X at @kaylajjimenez.