California's Education System Faces Federal Scrutiny

A single letter from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has ignited a firestorm of debate in California. On March 27, 2025, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins informed Governor Gavin Newsom that the agency is reviewing federal funding tied to research and education in the state. The move signals a broader push by the Trump administration to ensure taxpayer dollars align with federal laws and its priorities, thrusting California’s education system into the national spotlight.

At the heart of this review lies a clash between state and federal authority. The USDA is backing an investigation by the U.S. Department of Education into whether California’s policies violate the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). This federal law grants parents access to their children’s education records, but a new California law has stirred controversy by limiting what schools can share about a student’s gender identity. For a state heavily reliant on federal support, the stakes couldn’t be higher.

California Assembly Bill 1955, signed into law by Newsom and effective since January 1, 2025, prohibits school staff from being required to disclose a student’s gender identity to their parents without the student’s consent. Supporters of the measure, including child welfare advocates, argue it protects vulnerable students, especially those in households where revealing such information could lead to rejection or harm. Data from 2022 shows over 300,000 U.S. adolescents identify as transgender, a number that’s doubled in recent years, underscoring the real-world impact of these policies.

On the flip side, federal officials and groups like the California Justice Center contend that AB 1955 undermines parental rights enshrined in FERPA, a law dating back to 1974. They point to cases, like a recent lawsuit revived by a federal appellate court, where a California mother alleged school staff socially transitioned her child without her knowledge. The USDA’s letter frames this as part of a larger effort to shield students from what it calls a ‘radical transgender ideology,’ a phrase that’s drawn sharp criticism for its loaded tone.

California’s education system leans heavily on federal funding, pulling in roughly $16.3 billion annually. That includes $2 billion for low-income students through Title I and $1.33 billion for special education programs. Research institutions, like the University of California system, also bank on federal grants, with $2.6 billion from the National Institutes of Health alone last year. A finding of FERPA noncompliance could jeopardize these funds, a risk that’s rattled educators and administrators across the state.

Historical tensions between state and federal education policies aren’t new. Since the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act, federal dollars have come with strings attached, from civil rights enforcement to testing mandates under No Child Left Behind. California’s progressive bent, seen in laws like AB 1955, often puts it at odds with conservative federal directives, a dynamic amplified under the current administration’s focus on dismantling diversity initiatives and reinforcing parental authority.

The issue splits opinions down the middle. Advocates for student privacy, including some educators and mental health experts, argue that laws like AB 1955 create a lifeline for transgender youth. Studies show gender-affirming care, from counseling to medical interventions, can ease dysphoria and improve mental health. Yet, the rapid rise in such interventions—over 13,000 on minors between 2017 and 2023—has fueled unease among medical professionals and parents who question the long-term effects, like infertility or stunted growth.

Parents’ rights groups, backed by federal officials, see a different picture. They argue that withholding information from families risks alienation and hasty medical decisions. Some point to international trends, noting that countries like Sweden and the UK have tightened restrictions on youth gender care after reviews raised concerns about evidence gaps. In the U.S., the debate remains a patchwork of state policies and federal pushback, with California as a key battleground.

The USDA’s review, paired with the Education Department’s investigation, leaves California in a precarious spot. If federal agencies find AB 1955 violates FERPA, the state could face funding cuts, a move that would ripple through classrooms and research labs. Schools might then grapple with balancing student privacy against federal compliance, a tightrope walk that’s already sparked legal challenges and public outcry.

This standoff reflects deeper questions about who gets to shape a child’s education. It’s a tug-of-war between state autonomy and federal oversight, between protecting students and empowering parents. As the review unfolds, Californians—and the nation—will be watching to see how this clash reshapes the landscape of education and rights.