check.republican

← roster

LM

Linda McMahon

RepublicanSecretary of Education
Age77 (b. 1948-10-04)
GenderFemale
In office since2025-01-20 (~1 yrs)
Race / ethnicityWhite (Welsh-American descent)
ReligionRoman Catholic (converted; raised Baptist)
EducationB.A. in French, East Carolina University (1969)
Prior occupationBusiness executive; co-founder, President (1993) and CEO (1997-2009) of World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE/Titan Sports); earlier receptionist/paralegal
Military serviceNo
BirthplaceNew Bern, North Carolina
Marital statusMarried (separated from Vince McMahon since 2024) — Vince McMahon
Children2
ResidenceGreenwich, Connecticut
Notable relativesHusband Vince McMahon (WWE founder/CEO); children Shane McMahon and Stephanie McMahon (both WWE executives)

Pending research: languages · openly lgbtq.

Career & politics

Previous officesMember, Connecticut State Board of Education (2009-2010) · Administrator, U.S. Small Business Administration (2017-2019) · Republican nominee, U.S. Senate from Connecticut (2010, lost) · Republican nominee, U.S. Senate from Connecticut (2012, lost)
LeadershipU.S. Secretary of Education (2025-present) · Co-chair, Trump 2024 transition team · Chair/co-founder, America First Policy Institute (2021)
IdeologyRepublican; fiscal conservative; advocate of school choice and dismantling/reducing the Department of Education

Financial

Net worth: disclosed + (2025) · estimate

TKO Group Holdings (WWE/UFC parent) stockstock · $50,000,000 · 2025
Ares Management Corp.private_equity · 2025
University of Connecticut higher-education bondsother · $1,750,000–$6,500,000 · 2025
Higher-education municipal bonds (University of Arizona, Texas State, UC System, University of Colorado)other · $1,000,000–$5,000,000 · 2025
North Haven Private Income Fundfund · 2025
BlackRock Health Sciences Opportunities Fundfund · 2025

Scandals & crimes ledger

pendingWWE 'Ring Boys' Civil Negligence Lawsuit
sexual-misconduct · 1980s-1990s · U.S. District Court, District of Maryland · As of June 2026, the case is in discovery. In December 2025, Judge James K. Bredar denied most motions to dismiss, allowing claims by two of the eight plaintiffs specifically against Linda McMahon to proceed. She lost a bid in May 2026 to force plaintiffs to identify themselves publicly. No final judgment has been entered.
Eight men who worked as underage 'ring boys' for WWE in the 1980s-90s filed a civil negligence lawsuit in October 2024 in Baltimore County Circuit Court (later removed to federal court) naming Linda McMahon, Vince McMahon, WWE, and TKO Group Holdings as defendants. The suit alleges that the McMahons knew or should have known that ring announcer Mel Phillips and others were sexually abusing the boys and failed to act. The Maryland Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Maryland Child Victims Act of 2023, clearing the way for the suit to proceed. In December 2025, the federal judge denied most motions to dismiss. Claims by John Does 2 and 6 specifically against Linda McMahon are proceeding to discovery as of June 2026. The case has not been adjudicated on the merits.
resolvedAnti-DEI 'Dear Colleague Letter' Directive Ruled Unconstitutional and Vacated
abuse-of-office · 2025-02-14 · On February 14, 2025, the Department of Education under Secretary Linda McMahon issued a 'Dear Colleague Letter' declaring that DEI programs in schools and universities would be treated as unlawful discrimination under Title VI and threatening to cut federal funding from institutions that maintained such programs, later paired with a certification requirement for state education agencies. The National Education Association, its New Hampshire affiliate, the Center for Black Educator Development, and the American Federation of Teachers (in a companion case) sued, arguing the directive was unconstitutionally vague, viewpoint-discriminatory in violation of the First Amendment, and issued without the notice-and-comment process required by the Administrative Procedure Act. Multiple federal judges (D.N.H., D. Md.) issued preliminary injunctions blocking enforcement in 2025. The underlying directive was vacated and set aside by final judgment in the companion case American Federation of Teachers v. U.S. Department of Education, and on February 18, 2026, Judge Landya McCafferty entered a final order in National Education Association v. U.S. Department of Education (1:25-cv-00091, D.N.H.) formally closing the case on that basis, permanently barring the government from enforcing, relying on, or reviving the letter. · Directive vacated and permanently enjoined by final judgment; Department of Education withdrew/ceased enforcing the policy.
A Department of Education anti-DEI funding directive issued under Secretary McMahon was found unconstitutional and procedurally unlawful by federal courts and was permanently vacated by final judgment in February 2026.
ongoingCourt Blocks Abrupt Cancellation of ESSER COVID-19 Relief Fund Spending Extensions
abuse-of-office · 2025-03-28 · On March 28, 2025, Education Secretary Linda McMahon sent a letter abruptly moving up the deadline for states to spend previously approved extensions of pandemic-era ESSER (Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief) funds, reversing extensions the department itself had granted between 2023 and early 2025. Sixteen states and the District of Columbia sued in the Southern District of New York, alleging the reversal violated federal grant-modification procedures and the Administrative Procedure Act. On May 6-7, 2025, U.S. District Judge Edgardo Ramos granted a preliminary injunction, finding the plaintiff states had shown a likelihood of success on the merits, and barred the department from enforcing the cancellation against the suing states pending further litigation. · Preliminary injunction issued barring enforcement of the funding cancellation against the plaintiff states/D.C.; litigation ongoing.
A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction finding the Education Department's 2025 abrupt cancellation of COVID relief fund spending extensions, ordered under Secretary McMahon, was likely unlawful; the case remains in ongoing litigation.