Maryland judge considers reinstating DOGE cuts to research, staff at Department of Education

A Maryland judge is weighing whether to block cuts that impact the Department of Education's research and its jobs.

The Trump administration's cuts to the Department of Education took center stage at federal court in Maryland on Wednesday, with those who rely on research fighting to get contracts reinstated and stop workers from losing their jobs. 

The cuts hit the Institute of Education Sciences, the research arm of the Department of Education, including some programs mandated by federal statutes.

The plaintiffs said Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, also known as DOGE, came in with a wrecking ball in February and cut off funding with "sweeping, arbitrary" actions, slicing staff to the bone. 

Education research, jobs cut

Rachel Dinkes, the president and CEO of the Knowledge Alliance, said many of her members have been affected by the cuts.

That is why she closely watched arguments in the Baltimore courtroom as Judge Stephanie Gallagher weighs granting a temporary injunction to force the Trump administration to reinstate some of the 89 contracts worth nearly $900 million that DOGE abruptly slashed earlier this year.

"At a time when our nation had a report card with some of the lowest math and reading scores is not the time to turn our back on knowing what works for kids," Dinkes said.

Plaintiffs who rely on that research sued and said online access has been cut off. 

Projects that have lasted years, some that taxpayers have already funded with tens of millions of dollars, have abruptly ended. 

The plaintiffs claim the Trump administration's actions are illegal in part because Congress authorized the spending.

"The administration had a DOGE staffer come in and order a mass contract cancellation, terminating almost all the work that the agency was carrying out—and then they designated 90% of the staff for termination," said Daniel McGrath, an attorney for plaintiffs with Democracy Forward. "Now, the Trump administration is coming in and saying that they should not be held accountable for those actions."

McGrath continued, "They don't really need to carry out those functions. They have no plan to do so, and our clients are associations of education, researchers who do really important public-interest work to figure out what is going to give our kids better opportunities in the future. And they are bringing this case to ensure that our students and our children have a better future."

Government attorneys admitted they had few specifics. They did not dispute the cuts and lack of online access to crucial research. 

Trump on the Department of Education 

In Maryland, there have been numerous protests over cuts to federal programs.

Two months ago, the president signed an executive order to begin dismantling the Department of Education.     

"We're going to shut it down. Shut it down. It's doing us no good. We want to return our services to the states," President Trump said in March.

What's next? 

Judge Gallagher declined to immediately restore all contracts and jobs. 

She said that it is too broad, but the judge signaled that federally mandated programs must continue, and she was open to reinstating some of what had been cut if it is required by statute. 

Gallagher ordered the government to provide contracts to the plaintiffs by next week to narrow their argument and said she would likely rule on an injunction by early next month when terminations at the Department of Education are set to take effect.  

"We're optimistic that the judge was receptive to those arguments and they are going to be litigated expeditiously," McGrath said.

Dinkes stressed this is not a partisan issue. 

"Many parents in this country want to know how to help our child succeed. Why terminate a contract that was helping us learn just that?" Dinkes said. 

You can read more about what the Department of Education does here.