Project 2025 and Federal Influence Over K-12 Curricula

Education Policy Brief #204 | Steve Piazza | June 11, 2025

Although President Trump campaigned by keeping distance between himself and Project 2025, it is clear that his agenda since his inauguration has run parallel to the movement in many areas, including education.

In no more than two months into his presidency, the President issued an Executive Order, Improving Education Outcomes by Empowering Parents, States, and Communities, calling for the elimination of the Department of Education (DOE) in order to give control of schools to the states and local education agencies. This is right in line with Project 2025’s philosophy.

While the executive branch is not legally permitted to completely eliminate the DOE, the department, like many other governmental agencies, has experienced staff reductions and policy reform has begun.

Another power the DOE itself does not have is mandating state curriculum. That authority already lies at the state and local level, as per the Department of Education Organization Act, 20 U.S.C. § 3403(b), and the

Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 7907(a).

But some of the changes called for by Project 2025 have indirect implications for curricular reform, many of which are presently being realized.

Policy Analysis

The intentions of Project 2025 regarding governmental reform are clearly presented in A Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, a 900-page document published in 2023 by the Heritage Foundation. Like other administration departments targeted, the DOE has undergone scrutiny and is presented as an obstacle to the general welfare of U.S. citizens.

In the opening sentence of the analysis of the DOE, the document states on page 319, “Federal education policy should be limited and, ultimately, the federal Department of Education should be eliminated.” The future of education, the authors believe, relies on the states untethering from any federal level interference and being able to themselves determine what changes are needed in schools.

Specified changes include such areas as student discipline, school choice, and parental involvement. But it also directly addresses specific areas of the curriculum that need to be affected. As early as page 5, the document demands that “the noxious tenets of “critical race theory” and “gender ideology” should be excised from curricula in every public school in the country.”

And one way that this can be enforced is through funding incentives, particularly the threat of withholding money from those states not complying.

Yet, even prior to Trump’s election to a second term, some states had already begun to make curricular changes that reflect this spirit of Project 2025. Over 20 states now have passed laws to restrict curricula that may include gender and race concepts that are determined divisive. This means that specific language and concepts are being avoided in the classroom, and that even books have been removed from classrooms and school libraries. Many of these actions have been challenged in court, but the spirit of reforms which coincide with Project 2025 initiatives, whether intentional or not, remains.

And now with the Trump Administration in place, states’ litmus test of curricular attacks seems to be over, and the attention has turned mostly to less incendiary issues. According to the National Governors Association, these six areas will be the focus of educational themes in 2025: funding, technical education, teacher training, achievements, early childhood, mental and physical being, and cell phone usage. A seventh item, school choice, is more controversial, but it’s been on the table for some time.

All this is to say is that the states can now rely on the federal government to divert the attention of social issues in curricula from the states and take the heat so they don’t have to. So, if and when curricular choices are made at the state and local level, they would not so quickly or easily find their way to mainstream attention. People must search deep into state departments of education and local resources to find out for themselves what’s actually being mandated to be taught.

The ongoing issue remains that many of the restrictive efforts encouraged by the federal level will have implications beyond the loss of financial support. Critics look at this as a means to side step federal law that protects civil rights of individuals. Proponents look at it as a means to reform schools along ideological grounds.

Indeed, the courts may determine how much the Trump Administration has influence over how curriculum development plays out. One thing is certain: it has had an impact on the way that educational policy is being discussed. This includes what is being taught, and how it has become highly politicized to the point that educators are fearing retribution for speaking out professionally on what works best for their students.

Time will tell what any forthcoming state laws inspired by Project 2025 will directly mandate which K-12 subjects are to be taught and what concepts need to be removed. It’s already begun at the college and university level, where  legislation passed earlier this year in Florida, Utah, and Ohio require graduation requirements to include Western Civilization-centered courses with specified readings and drop any courses having to do with race and gender. Analysts agree that similar action is expected for elementary and secondary school curricula. If this does happen, Project 2025 has the momentum to outlast what its name implies.

Engagement Resources

Ballotpedia offers a comprehensive list of links to state education departments and the corresponding state content standards for each.

The revamped U.S. Department of Education site reflects many of the tenets of Project 2025.