California accepts billions in federal funds for education while defying federal law

The California legislature passed the 2025-26 budget bill earlier this month and sent it to Governor Gavin Newsom for his signature. The bill amounts to $325 billion, marking a spending increase of 51 percent since Newsom first took office in 2019.

Spending on education has similarly ballooned, despite the fact that enrollment in traditional public schools has decreased by more than 409,000 students since 2019 —  even as California’s new grade, Transitional Kindergarten (TK), was fully implemented. In the same timeframe, charter school enrollment increased by over 52,000, indicating a widespread interest in alternatives to traditional public schools.

Traditional public school enrollment is not the only thing declining: test scores continue to remain lower than pre-COVID levels, with only 47 percent of students meeting grade-level reading standards and 35.5 percent meeting grade-level math standards. Public education is at an inflection point in California due to widespread concerns over student achievement. Yet California leaders seem more focused on fighting culture wars than on improving student performance.

What’s in the budget bill for education, and what does it mean for California students? Some items, while expected to be in the state’s education budget, come with eye-popping price tags. Examples include:

• $4.26 billion to provide “before school or after school and intersessional expanded learning opportunities, in addition to expanded learning opportunities on nonschooldays” (In other words, to expand school’s reach into students’ lives so they spend more time in public school programs.)
• $5.5 billion in state funding for special education, not including federal funds
• $2.85 billion for State Preschool by local and non-local educational agencies, in addition to millions more for the administration and programmatic monitoring of State Preschool
• $33.3 million for the Commission on Teacher Credentialing
• $29 million to create a website for “college planning and preparation”
• $10 million set aside for zero-emission school buses.

The budget also includes more than 240 new bureaucratic positions, as well as $77,000 to support an existing role that trains teachers to “support lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and questioning students” pursuant to a 2019 law.

But state education spending is only part of the picture — federal funding plays a major role, as even a quick scan of the education budget makes clear.

Notable items supported by federal spending include:

• $3 billion for child nutrition programs, compared to an additional $23 million in state spending,
• $284.6 million to support federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act programs, such as Title I (low income students), Migrant Education, and Title III (English Learners).
• A $12.6 million federal grant for literacy programs

Without these federal funds, California’s budget crisis would dramatically worsen, and California’s most vulnerable students would stand to lose crucial programs and supports. But California leaders seem willing to risk the loss of federal funds by defying federal law, which protects girls’ and women’s participation in sports.

The Trump administration has notified the State of California that it is investigating the Golden State “to determine whether Title IX, a landmark federal civil rights law, is being violated by AB 1266, a state law permitting males to participate on female sports teams at state schools.”

California Justice Center founder Julie Hamill told CNN on May 30, “The state of California needs to stop enforcing [AB 1266] if we are going to abide by Title IX. If California doesn’t want to do that…they need to stop accepting federal funds… You have to comply with federal law to accept federal funds.”

The federal Department of Justice also sent a letter to California school districts asking them to certify that they will not follow a California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) bylaw that “requires California public high schools to allow male participation in girls’ interscholastic events.” The letter cites the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

After that letter, California Attorney General Rob Bonta sued the Trump administration to defend California’s policies, despite the governor’s recent admission on his podcast that allowing males to compete against female athletes is “deeply unfair.”

California’s students need a focused, responsive education system, especially at a time when COVID learning loss lingers. Rather than spend time and resources defying the federal government the state depends on, Gov. Newsom and the California Department of Education should reassess their priorities and consider what California families want most: a quality education for the next generation.

Sheridan Karras is the research manager at California Policy Center.

CPC Research Interns Caleb Chou-Green and Abby Nordell contributed to the research for this article.