Linda McMahon became ed secretary without discussing schools' scariest issue: guns
For almost three hours, Linda McMahon sat through a confirmation hearing last month in which senators pressed her on everything from teacher pay to transgender athletes. But none from either party asked her about school shootings.
That's a glaring oversight, according to some leaders working to reduce youth gun violence, while others say that fears about the Department of Education's possible closure so dominated the hearing that there was little time to question McMahon about the full spectrum of education topics. Confirmed as education secretary on March 3, it's unclear how McMahon will address the gun violence epidemic, but her previous comments on gun control and the White House's actions on the issue so far suggest to prevention advocates that this administration won't make it a priority — potentially endangering youth, domestic violence victims and other vulnerable groups.
'The No. 1 concern amongst American families is making sure we have safe classrooms,' said Keri Rodrigues, president of the National Parents Union, a nonprofit organization working to improve educational outcomes and policies for children and families. 'Can we keep our children alive in America's classrooms? The idea that we would not even ask the next U.S. secretary of education about what she plans to do to keep our classrooms safer is ridiculous.'
Rodrigues, who was in the room during the Senate confirmation hearing in February, said that President Donald Trump's plans to dismantle the Department of Education make it imperative to know McMahon's approach to school gun violence. On Tuesday, McMahon announced that the agency will eliminate over 1,300 workers, nearly half of its staff, heightening concerns about its potential demise. Twenty-one attorneys general in Democratic-led states sued the Trump administration over the layoffs on Thursday, arguing that eliminating the staffers was 'illegal and unconstitutional.'
Gun violence is the leading cause of death for children and teens, based on data from the Centers for Disease for Control and Prevention, and disproportionately kills youth of color. School shootings have steadily increased over time, with 39 school shootings recorded this year, according to the K-12 Shooting Database, which tracks gun violence incidents on campuses.
McMahon should have been asked 'how she plans to be able to address these very real and very serious issues without having a U.S. Department of Education that is working with states and working with districts,' Rodrigues said.
The Department of Education did not respond by publication time to The 19th's request for comment about McMahon's plans on gun violence.
During her 2017 confirmation hearing, former Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, a Trump nominee, suggested that guns might protect students from grizzly bears, leading to widespread ridicule. Last year, McMahon took to social media to express her concerns with red flag laws, or Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPO), that allow guns to be confiscated from individuals considered a threat to themselves or others.
ERPO, she wrote, 'could easily be used to REMOVE Firearms from Law-Abiding Citizens. Chicago and NYC have some of the strictest 'gun laws' in the country and yet they also have some of the highest gun violence. Recently 9 people were killed in 24 hours in Chicago. A pregnant mom was seriously injured and her 11-year-old son who was trying to protect her was killed.'
McMahon argued that it would have been more effective to keep the convicted felon who shot the mother and son in prison than risk removing firearms from individuals without criminal records. Her views appear to align with those of the president, who on February 7 issued an executive order directing the attorney general to review all regulations and policies created during President Joe Biden's administration that purportedly infringe on the public's rights to bear arms and to devise a plan to counteract such restrictions.
'This administration has made it pretty clear that it is not looking to prioritize gun violence prevention, whether that's in the nominees that it has put forward, including the education secretary, or the executive order on the Second Amendment that came out of the White House,' said Nina Vinik, founder and president of Project Unloaded, a Gen Z-focused gun violence prevention group. 'The administration is looking to roll back the progress that's been made over the last decade or more to reduce gun violence.'
Noah Lumbantobing, former director of communications for March for Our Lives (MFOL), a student-led gun violence prevention organization, said he suspects Trump's administration will reverse the policies the group supports to retaliate against the Biden administration.
'It's so clearly about vengeance and not at all about children's safety, so that's scary,' said Lumbantobing, who transitioned out of MFOL on Wednesday to step into a new role in the gun safety movement. 'We still don't know what's going to be on the chopping block, but we have no doubt that he's going to undo a lot of the things that we spent a lot of time fighting for, and even more importantly, things that have saved lives.'
In 2024, gun violence incidents on campuses dropped to 331 from 349 the prior year, according to the K-12 School Shooting Database. Lumbantobing attributes the decrease in shootings to the 'common-sense life-saving solutions' the Biden administration adopted. That includes an executive order Biden issued that expanded the definition of a gun dealer since some gun sellers were not only going undetected but also neglecting to perform background checks on customers.
'Now, they do have to do background checks and to act responsibly,' Lumbantobing said. 'That's going to get undone. So there's a lot of danger here, both in undoing some of the laws and also just selectively not enforcing laws that are on the books. It's going to kill children, and it's just for partisan gain.'
He also has concerns about how relaxing gun restrictions will affect victims of domestic violence, a problem the Biden administration addressed, in part, through tougher background checks.
'The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act tightened loopholes for dating partners to not be able to obtain firearms and potentially harm or kill their partners,' Lumbantobing said of the federal law passed in 2022 that provides states with funding to develop red flag laws and other interventions. If the Department of Justice 'chooses not to enforce the laws on the books, no one's looking out for victims of domestic abuse,' he added.
At least 110 domestic violence-related shootings have occurred at schools from 1966 to the present, the K-12 School Shooting Database reports. The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act routes resources to intervention programs to reduce gun crimes, but Lumbantobing said he isn't sure if that will happen under the Trump administration. He does give Trump credit, however, for supporting a ban on bump stocks, gun accessories that essentially turn semi-automatic rifles into automatic weapons. In 2017, during Trump's first term, a gunman used bump stocks to kill 60 people and wound hundreds of others at a Las Vegas music festival.
'So there's some hope that we have that he'll not be as constrained by GOP orthodoxy there, but it's not looking good,' Lumbantobing said. 'He moves with the wind.'
That the Trump administration has chosen not to continue the Office of Gun Violence Prevention established during Biden's tenure has also worried gun control supporters. Although Trump did not formally eliminate the office, he has yet to hire personnel to maintain it, Lumbantobing said. The office no longer has a functioning website either.
'What's so dangerous is that we may not notice it today or tomorrow, but in a year, two years, whenever the next mass shooting happens, I think we'll be able to look and see it's because Trump stopped enforcing the law,' Lumbantobing said.
The Office of Gun Violence Prevention represented a bipartisan approach to gun safety because it allowed the White House to focus on prevention in a holistic way that drew on government resources but did not require the creation of any new laws, Lumbantobing said.
'How do we fix this … within the constraints that we have? They made massive progress on that,' he said. 'Getting rid of that office is a refutation of that very premise, and I think it is a real dangerous one. If you can't agree with us that children dying is a bad thing, boy, are we in trouble.'
Several states, including California, Massachusetts, Maryland and Wisconsin, have opened — or passed legislation to open — their own offices of gun violence prevention, suggesting that states and not the federal government will take the lead on curbing gun violence prevention during the Trump administration.
'I think we're going to continue to see a world where gun safety exists in some places and not others,' Lumbantobing said. 'That's not the America that young people deserve.'
Although he would have liked to see senators ask McMahon more questions about school shootings during her confirmation hearing, he said their focus on the potential abolishment of the Department of Education was appropriate. Getting rid of that federal agency would be an attack on gun safety because of the work it does to reduce school shootings.
'The Department of Education has a critical role in that work and could have a bigger role,' Lumbantobing said. 'Just last year, we worked with Secretary [Miguel] Cardona to do a safe storage campaign to encourage parents. We understand that people are going to own guns. There's nothing wrong with that if you own a legally obtained firearm. But it's important that folks store those firearms safely because, otherwise, they show up in places we don't want, in school shootings, in instances of domestic violence or interpersonal violence, even amongst young people or kids shooting themselves accidentally.'
While March for Our Lives collaborated with Cardona on a safe storage campaign, Lumbantobing does not anticipate engaging in such work with McMahon.
'She has expressed no interest in that,' he said. 'We would love to, but she won't. Trump has come out and said that he wants to be the very best friend possible to the NRA [National Rifle Association], so we know how she'll approach it, whether she takes an ax to the Department of Education or just starts to unwind some of the pivotal policies that the Department of Ed pushes to keep kids safe.'
Trump's Cabinet picks are not the only concern of gun violence prevention groups. They also fear the impact of the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' recent decision that rescinded the federal restriction on 18-to-20-year-olds buying handguns. More than one mass school shooter has fallen into this age group. In 2022, an 18-year-old gunman massacred 21 people at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas. Four years before that, a 19-year-old fatally shot 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. In 2012, a 20-year-old shooter struck down 26 people at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.
'For the Fifth Circuit to say that trying to address the scourge of gun violence and its impact on young people with reasonable age restriction on handgun purchases is not permissible under the Second Amendment is potentially a real setback in terms of trying to address youth gun violence in this country' Vinik said.
Without being able to rely on government intervention or cooperation, gun prevention advocates are coming up with their own solutions to address youth gun violence. Project Unloaded, for example, hopes to shift the culture around gun use by providing young people with facts and figures about the drawbacks of firearms, including increased risk of homicide, suicide and accidents.
'When we give them that information in a way that's really engaging and accessible, they do increase their awareness of what those risks are, and it does lead them, in many cases, to shift away from a desire to use guns in the future,' Vinik said.
Since young people often learn about guns online, particularly on social media or through gaming platforms, Project Unloaded recently launched a campaign called 'Leave Guns in the Game' that involves a collaboration with about a dozen gamers who are also content creators on Tiktok, YouTube and Instagram. The campaign, Vinik said, aims to instill this message into youth: 'Play hard when you're in a video game, but in real life, at home, in your community, you're safer without guns.'
The post Linda McMahon became ed secretary without discussing schools' scariest issue: guns appeared first on The 19th.
News that represents you, in your inbox every weekday. Subscribe to our free, daily newsletter.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Could there be a military draft? Fears rise after US strike on Iran
Heightened tensions following the United States' June 21 attack on Iranian nuclear facilities has brought the specter of a military draft to the forefront of the minds of many. The U.S. struck three nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan June 21 in what has been dubbed "Operation Midnight Hammer." In a June 22 Truth Social post, President Donald Trump said he was open to a regime change in the country, hours after Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the U.S. did not want a regime change. There are currently no bills before Congress to institute a draft, however the Washington Post reported last year that influential former administration officials as well as some GOP lawmakers have publicly suggested a "national service mandate." Here's what you need to know about a possible military draft. Fallout of US attack on Iran: US warns of 'heightened threat environment' after strikes on Iran nukes When was the last time the draft was used? The last draft call occurred in 1972, according to Air & Space Forces Magazine, and the draft was announced to be no longer in use by then Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird on Jan. 27, 1973. The final person inducted into the U.S. military – Dwight Elliott Stone, a 24-year-old apprentice plumber from Sacramento, California, – entered the Army on June 30, 1973, according to the magazine. Who would be in charge of reinstating the draft? Legislation would need to be passed through Congress amending the Military Selective Service Act in order to reinstate a draft, according to the Selective Service Agency. In 2015, then New York Democratic Representative Charles Rangel introduced a bill to re-instate a draft alongside a "War Tax" bill to point out the inequity of war as then President Barack Obama attempted to galvanize support for an Authorization for Use of Military Force against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. "When I served, the entire nation shared the sacrifices through the draft and increased taxes. But today, only a fraction of America shoulders the burden. If war is truly necessary, we must all come together to support and defend our nation," Rangle, who served in the Korean War, said in a statement at the time, according to The Hill. Who would be eligible for a draft? Currently, all men between 18 to 25 are required to register with the Selective Service System. The Selective Service Agency states that, should a draft be reinstated, the first to receive induction orders would be those whose turn 20 years old during the year of the lottery. Additional drafts would follow for those turning 21 through 25, then 19 and 18 would occur if additional soldiers were required. Who would be ineligible for the draft? All of those who have registered with the Selective Service are presumed to be eligible to be drafted. The only exemptions from Selective Service registration are if a man: A draftee could request to be reclassified, including as a conscientious objector, after he is drafted but before the day he is due to report. High school and college students can ask for service to be postponed while draftees can request hardship deferments. Ministers, certain elected officials and some dual nationals would be exempt from the draft.
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
How Trump changed the future, kill the suicide bill and other commentary
From the right: Don Just Changed the Future 'In the case of the Middle East what Trump said about himself is true,' marvels Commentary's John Podhoretz. 'He said he doesn't start wars. Trump said he ends wars' — and Saturday night 'was Trump ending this evil war of Iran's, either right now or after more pain causes the mullahs to cry uncle. For Israel didn't start this war either. It was launched, by Iran and its catamites, on Oct. 7.' The strike's 'impact is potentially so enormous, and so world-historic, we needn't rush into interpreting its larger meaning.' But: 'Trump has said since the assassination attempt in Butler, Pa., that he believes God spared him for a reason. And now, so do I.' Conservative: Kill the Suicide Bill Gov. Hochul should veto 'The Medical Aid in Dying Act, which passed the State Assembly in April,' and 'would allow people diagnosed with terminal illnesses to request a prescription for lethal drugs,' urges City Journal's John Hirschauer. Besides moving to 'effectively recognize suicide as a human right,' 'the bill has relatively few safeguards,' as 'it does not require that the person requesting the drugs be psychiatrically evaluated.' 'And the bill's drafters declined to include a residency requirement,' meaning people from across the country could come to New York and euthanize themselves. 'Human life is marked by terrible suffering.' 'But once the state decides that anyone, on account of illness, has the 'right' to kill himself, it has decided that suffering can render life worthless.' Liberal: UFT Winning Mayoral Primary New York schools are 'worse today' despite 'an incredible $36,000 spent per pupil — about twice the national average — with National Assessment of Educational Progress scores of 28% proficient in reading and a few points more in math,' grumbles Joe Klein at Substack. One problem: Teachers, like other city workers, are 'unable to be fired.' Although education 'is the absolute key to future success for New York,' it 'hasn't been much discussed in the Democratic mayoral primary.' In a Manhattan Institute report, all of the candidates 'received D's and F's, except one' — Whitney Tilson, 'an obscure Wall Street moderate' despised by the teachers union. The UFT hasn't endorsed any candidate, likely due to its 'utter confidence that the winner will abide by its wishes.' From the right: LA Needed Trump's Help 'Gov. Gavin Newsom told Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that local law enforcement officers were 'sufficient to maintain order' ' in Los Angeles, yet LAPD officers tell Heather Mac Donald at The Wall Street Journal, 'We don't have s— under control.' She cites numerous instances of violence that, by 'sheer luck,' weren't life-threatening. 'Should Trump have waited to see if the locals' would eventually control the situation? The answer's clear: 'Police Chief Jim McDonnell put the LAPD on tactical alert' and canceled all time off. Yet days later, Mayor Karen Bass nonetheless had to order a curfew. 'Still the disorder continued.' Fact is, 'There is more danger from tolerating' lawlessness than from responding to it 'with all legal means.' Libertarian: Cut the F-35 'As the U.S. grapples with ballooning federal budgets and increasingly necessary spending cuts, the military remains ripe for austerity,' blares Joe Lancaster at Reason. The F-35 jet is a perfect example of a 'program that deserves to be scrapped.' Since its inception after 9/11, 'the jet has proven itself not ready from prime time, both more expensive and less functional than promised.' Too bad 'the House Appropriations Committee's proposed Defense Appropriations Bill for 2026 would spend $8.5 billion on F-35s,' and 'President Donald Trump has called the F-35 'the greatest fighter jet in the world.'' 'The F-35 means to replace previous-generation aircraft like the F-16, but instead, the obsolete models are running circles around their intended replacement.' Every new thing we hear about the F-35, 'proves that it's long past time to kill the program.' — Compiled by The Post Editorial Board
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Investors brace for oil price spike, rush to safe havens after US bombs Iran nuclear sites
A US attack on Iranian nuclear sites could push oil prices even higher and trigger a knee-jerk rush to safety, investors said, as they assessed how the latest escalation of tensions would ripple through the global economy. The reaction in Middle East stock markets, which trade on Sunday, suggested investors were assuming a benign outcome, even as Iran intensified its missile attacks on Israel in response to the sudden, deep U.S. involvement in the conflict. President Trump called the attack 'a spectacular military success' in a televised address to the nation and said Iran's 'key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.' He said the U.S. military could go after other targets in Iran if the country did not agree to peace. Advertisement Iran said it reserves all options to defend itself, and warned of 'everlasting consequences.' Speaking in Istanbul, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said Tehran was weighing its options for retaliation and would consider diplomacy only after carrying out its response. 7 President Trump called the attack 'a spectacular military success.' REUTERS Investors said they expected US involvement would cause a stock market selloff and a possible bid for the dollar and other safe-haven assets when major markets reopen, but also said much uncertainty remained. Advertisement 'I think the markets are going to be initially alarmed, and I think oil will open higher,' said Mark Spindel, chief investment officer at Potomac River Capital. 'I think the uncertainty is going to blanket the markets, as now Americans everywhere are going to be exposed. It's going to raise uncertainty and volatility, particularly in oil,' he added. One indicator of how markets will react in the coming week was the price of ether, the second-largest cryptocurrency and a gauge of retail investor sentiment. Advertisement 'We don't have any damage assessment and that will take some time. Even though (Trump) has described this as 'done', we're engaged,' Spindel said. Ether was down 8.5% on Sunday, taking losses since the first Israeli strikes on Iran on June 13 to 13%. 7 Iran has warned of 'everlasting consequences' over the U.S. attack. via REUTERS Most Gulf stock markets, however, seemed unconcerned by the early morning attacks, with the main indexes in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait up slightly or flat. Israel's Tel Aviv main index was at an all-time high. Advertisement A key concern for markets centers around the potential impact of Middle East developments on oil prices and thus on inflation. Rising inflation could dampen consumer confidence and lessen the chance of near-term interest rate cuts. Saul Kavonic, a senior energy analyst at equity research firm MST Marquee in Sydney, said Iran could respond by targeting American interests in the Middle East, including Gulf oil infrastructure in places such as Iraq or harassing ship passages through the Strait of Hormuz. 7 Traders are bracing for a rocky day on Wall Street when markets open Monday. AFP via Getty Images The Strait of Hormuz lies between Oman and Iran and is the primary export route for oil producers such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq and Kuwait. 'Much depends on how Iran responds in the coming hours and days, but this could set us on a path towards $100 oil if Iran respond as they have previously threatened to,' Kavonic said. While global benchmark Brent crude futures have risen as much as 18% since June 10, hitting a near five-month high of $79.04 on Thursday, the S&P 500 has been little changed, following an initial drop when Israel launched its attacks on Iran on June 13. 7 Brent crude futures have risen as much as 18% since June 10, Getty Images Jamie Cox, managing partner at Harris Financial Group, said oil prices would likely spike before leveling off in a few days as the attacks could lead Iran to seek a peace deal with Israel and the U.S. Advertisement 'With this demonstration of force and total annihilation of its nuclear capabilities, they've lost all of their leverage and will likely hit the escape button to a peace deal,' Cox said. Economists warn that a dramatic rise in oil prices could damage a global economy already strained by Trump's tariffs. 7 During past Mideast, stocks initially languished but soon recovered to trade higher in the months ahead. AFP via Getty Images Still, any pullback in equities might be fleeting, history suggests. During past eruptions of Middle East tensions, including the 2003 Iraq invasion and the 2019 attacks on Saudi oil facilities, stocks initially languished but soon recovered to trade higher in the months ahead. Advertisement On average, the S&P 500 slipped 0.3% in the three weeks following the start of conflict, but was 2.3% higher on average two months following the conflict, according to data from Wedbush Securities and CapIQ Pro. An escalation in the conflict could have mixed implications for the U.S. dollar, which has tumbled this year amid worries over diminished U.S. exceptionalism. 7 Analysts say the dollar could benefit from a safety bid in the event of direct US engagement in the Iran-Israel war. AFP via Getty Images In the event of U.S. direct engagement in the Iran-Israel war, the dollar could initially benefit from a safety bid, analysts said. Advertisement 'Do we see a flight to safety? That would signal yields going lower and the dollar getting stronger,' said Steve Sosnick, chief market strategist at IBKR in Greenwich, Conn. 'It's hard to imagine stocks not reacting negatively and the question is how much.' Jack McIntyre, portfolio manager for global fixed income at Brandywine Global Investment Management in Philadelphia, said it was uncertain whether U.S. Treasuries would rally after the U.S. attack, largely due to the market's hypersensitivity to inflation. 'This could lead to regime change (which) ultimately could have a much bigger impact on the global economy if Iran shifts towards a more friendly, open economic regime,' said McIntyre.
