OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta co-led a multistate coalition in submitting a comment letter opposing the U.S. Department of Education's proposal to provide the Trump Administration with broad discretion in educational grantmaking decisions. The submission challenges a regulatory change announced by the department on August 24, 2026, that would alter how federal education funds are distributed. "Its latest target is vital funding for our children, teachers, and schools," Bonta said.

"In California, protecting our students' educational future is a top priority," he said. "I urge the federal government to abandon this proposal," he said.

The coalition argues the proposed rule violates the Administrative Procedure Act because it exceeds the U.S. Department of Education's statutory authority and is contrary to law. Additionally, the coalition argues the proposed rule violates the Administrative Procedure Act because the agency acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner by including factors Congress did not intend the agency to consider.

The legal challenge also rests on constitutional grounds. The coalition argues the proposed rule violates the Separation of Powers Clause of the U.S. Constitution because the President lacks the authority to attach conditions to federal funds that Congress did not authorize. The coalition urges the U.S. Department of Education to reconsider and withdraw the proposal.

Bonta criticized the administration's approach to federal funding in a statement. "The Trump Administration continues to disregard Congress's authority in its relentless attempts to seize the power of the purse and leverage federal funding to advance its hateful policy priorities," said Attorney General Bonta. He added that the administration's latest target is vital funding for children, teachers, and schools.

Why It Matters

The dispute centers on the scope of executive authority over federal spending and the statutory limits of the U.S. Department of Education. The department was established in 1979 with a statutory mandate to protect the rights of State and local governments and strengthen their control over educational programs, per 20 U.S.C. § 3403. Its authority to allocate or reallocate functions among its officers is explicitly limited by 20 U.S.C. § 3473(a), which prohibits transferring responsibilities to external agencies without congressional authorization.

The coalition contends the proposal is part of a broader pattern of using federal funding as a tool for political influence, including conditions related to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. In March 2025, a multistate coalition led by Bonta filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration's transfer of core Department of Education functions to other agencies, citing violations of the Administrative Procedures Act and constitutional separation of powers. The Trump Administration initiated a workforce reduction in March 2025 that impacted nearly 50% of the Department of Education's employees as part of efforts to dismantle the department, according to a California Attorney General press release.

Previous administrative actions have faced legal setbacks. In 2025, the Trump Administration attempted to terminate over $148 million in federal grants for K-12 teacher preparation programs in California, which were later found to be arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act. Similarly, in 2025, the administration issued a directive that allowed the termination of grants based on policy preferences, a move challenged in court and ultimately found to be arbitrary and capricious. The Department of Education's 2026 proposal to prioritize lower indirect cost rate applicants mirrors provisions from the Trump Administration's 2025 OMB rule, which faced bipartisan criticism for enabling political interference in grantmaking, as reported by Inside Higher Ed.

Timeline

On July 13, 2026, California Attorney General Bonta joined a coalition of 22 attorneys general and two governors in submitting a comment letter opposing the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) proposed rewrite of rules governing nearly every federal grant. The U.S. Department of Education announced the proposal on August 24, 2026. The proposal would make substantive changes to the rules governing how the U.S. Department of Education administers grant programs, including both discretionary and formula grant programs.

On September 25, 2026, California Attorney General Bonta co-led a multistate coalition in submitting a comment letter opposing the U.S. Department of Education's proposal to provide the Trump Administration with broad discretion in educational grantmaking decisions. On that date, he stated, "We will not allow the U.S. Department of Education to overstep its authority and impose unlawful, discriminatory conditions on education funding." Also on September 25, 2026, he said, "The Trump Administration continues to disregard Congress's authority in its relentless attempts to seize the power of the purse and leverage federal funding to advance its hateful policy priorities." The coalition argues the proposed rule violates the Administrative Procedure Act because the U.S. Department of Education acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner by including factors Congress did not intend the agency to consider.

What's New

The U.S. Department of Education's authority to 'allocat[e] or reallocat[e] functions among the officers of the Department' is explicitly limited by 20 U.S.C. § 3473(a), which prohibits transferring responsibilities to external agencies without congressional authorization.

The U.S. Department of Education's proposal to allow the Trump Administration broad discretion in grantmaking decisions is part of a broader pattern of attempts to use federal funding as a tool for political influence, including the imposition of conditions related to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. In 2025, the Trump Administration issued a directive that allowed the termination of grants based on policy preferences, a move that was challenged in court and ultimately found to be arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act.

How Sources Differ

Sources differ on the characterization of the administration's authority. Bonta states, "We will not allow the U.S. Department of Education to overstep its authority and impose unlawful, discriminatory conditions on education funding."

Regarding the Trump Administration, oag.ca.gov reports on the July 13, 2026 coalition letter opposing the OMB proposal. Bonta says, "The Trump Administration continues to disregard Congress's authority in its relentless attempts to seize the power of the purse and leverage federal funding to advance its hateful policy priorities."

Regarding the California Attorney General, oag.ca.gov describes Bonta joining the July 13, 2026 coalition.

Regarding the attorney general role, oag.ca.gov shows Bonta's participation in the July 13, 2026 effort. The Office of the Attorney General press release, September 25, 2026, identifies Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and Washington Attorney General Nick Brown as co-leaders of the letter with Bonta.

Regarding rules governing nearly every federal grant, oag.ca.gov references the July 13, 2026 opposition to the OMB rewrite. The Office of the Attorney General press release, September 25, 2026, notes that Bonta previously co-led a multistate coalition in submitting a comment letter opposing the Office of Management and Budget's proposed rewrite of rules governing nearly every federal grant.