Some special education students, LGBTQ+ students and students who benefit from Title I funding are concerned cutting the Department of Education may lead to less protection of rights or a lack of funding for their programs.

Title I funding, used for supplemental programs to close the achievement gap, provides $2.4 billion in support for California school districts.

The Roseville Joint Union High School District (RJUHSD) receives approximately $4.2 million, or 2.4% of its overall budget, from federal funds. Two-thirds are designated for Title I schools, including Roseville, Antelope and Oakmont. To be eligible for Title I funds, 40% of students must qualify for free or reduced lunch.

“The biggest concern the district has is ensuring that we continue to receive funding for our students. Title I and special education serve our neediest students, and we want to make sure we have the staffing and resources they need to be successful,” RJUHSD Superintendent John Becker said.

Without a federal department, educational funding may be sourced from other places. States, cities and counties would take on the distribution of these funds. 

“I imagine that the funding is going to be shifted to a different federal department to oversee and then slowly be minimized and much more restrictive in how it can be implemented,” a representative from the Department of Education, who requested to be anonymous, said.

If the department is partially or entirely disbanded, changes likely wouldn’t take effect until Dec. 31, 2026.  The Secretary of Education has confirmed special education funding will remain intact.  Referencing the  Placer County Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA), Becker stated that special education students will not be affected due to state law.  SELPA guarantees  “free appropriate public education” by delivering high-quality special education programs and services. 

Assemblyman Joe Patterson said that California’s education budget comes from the state legislature, not the federal government, and that laws like Title IX and Title I would remain in effect regardless of the Department of Education’s existence. Since these laws are federal statutes passed by Congress, local school districts are legally required to follow them. Patterson noted that federal support for students with special needs would remain unaffected.

“There’s no evidence that eliminating or modifying the DOE would reduce student resources or funding. In fact, quite the contrary—it could mean more funding because you’re not also paying for a federal agency. Instead, the money would go directly to the state without the red tape of the federal level,” Patterson said.

President Trump’s executive order “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling” proposed withholding federal funding from schools promoting “gender ideology or discriminatory equity ideology.”

GBHS alumni and trans advocate Lee Randolph stressed that removing federal protections under Title IX could disproportionately harm queer and trans students, especially in Republican-led states without strong local safeguards. 

“Students in California, Oregon, and Washington would still have protections under state or district laws, but in many Republican states, we’d see those taken away,” Randolph said. “Even if we don’t have legal protections, LGBTQ+ students aren’t going anywhere—we’ve always been here, and no law is going to change that.”

Judah Joslyn, the Director of the Trans and Queer Youth Collective, a nonprofit that provides gender-affirming supplies and mental health support for LGBTQ+ youth in California’s Central Valley, said defunding the Department of Education would hit under-resourced schools the hardest—particularly those affected by redlining and systemic racism—while affluent districts would remain largely unaffected. 

“What we’re going to end up seeing is changes in funding affect an entire generation of youth who will lose access to the bare minimum they already have,” Joslyn said. “It’s going to have a devastating effect on the United States—socially and economically. In rural schools or districts in more conservative areas, it gives them license to increase anti-trans, anti-queer policies.”

Joslyn said if a federal law restricts transgender students’ rights in schools, California could still try to uphold its own protections, but schools receiving federal funding might be required to comply with the national policy. 

Dave Gaines, CEO of Sacramento Autistic Spectrum and Special Needs Alliance, which assists mentally diverse youth and families, expressed concerns that changes to the Department of Education could weaken Section 504 enforcement, potentially reducing protections for students with disabilities and support, particularly in cases where they do not qualify for an Individualized Education Program (IEP) but still need accommodations. 

Gaines said elimination of the Department of Education doesn’t mean elimination for funding, as Congress decides the budget and the Department of Education manages the money distributed.

“The court system and state agencies can enforce civil rights, but the Department of Education plays the key role in ensuring civil rights protections,” Gaines said.