Education Secretary Linda McMahon testifies during her Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee confirmation hearing on Feb. 13, 2025.  (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

A federal judge in Maryland ordered the Trump administration Thursday to pause enforcement of a new U.S. Education Department ban on diversity, equity and inclusion practices.

The order came as another federal judge in New Hampshire issued a preliminary injunction temporarily blocking the Trump administration from yanking federal funding from many schools.

The New Hampshire order, though, only applied to schools that employ members of the National Education Association — the country’s largest labor union, which brought the case challenging the ban — or the Center for Black Educator Development.

The rulings used different legal logic but arrived at the same conclusion: The administration’s ban on race-conscious practices is not valid.

In Maryland, U.S. District Judge Stephanie A. Gallagher said she ruled not on the merits of the policy, but the way the Trump administration developed it.

“This Court takes no view as to whether the policies at issue here are good or bad, prudent or foolish, fair or unfair. But this Court is constitutionally required to closely scrutinize whether the government went about creating and implementing them in the manner the law requires,” she wrote. “The government did not.”

Gallagher’s order pauses the enforcement of a Feb. 14 letter to school districts from Craig Trainor, the department’s acting assistant secretary for civil rights, that threatened to rescind federal funds for schools that use race-conscious practices in programming, admissions, scholarships and other aspects of student life.

In New Hampshire, U.S. District Judge Landya McCafferty wrote that “the loss of federal funding would cripple the operations of many educational institutions.”

McCafferty’s order has a nationwide effect, but McCafferty limited it to schools that employ NEA members, rejecting the union’s attempt to completely halt the policies outlined in the letter.

Teachers unions sued

The Feb. 14 letter drew swift legal action, and the National Education Association brought the suit in New Hampshire against the administration alongside the Center for Black Educator Development. 

The American Federation of Teachers — one of the largest teachers unions in the country — filed a complaint in February alongside its affiliate, AFT-Maryland. The American Sociological Association and a public school district in Oregon also sued over the letter.

“Today the court confirmed the importance of our job as educators to foster opportunity, dignity, and engagement,” Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, said in a statement after the Maryland ruling.

“The court agreed that this vague and clearly unconstitutional requirement is a grave attack on students, our profession, honest history, and knowledge itself,” she added. “It would hamper efforts to extend access to education, and dash the promise of equal opportunity for all, a central tenet of the United States since its founding.”

NEA also celebrated the preliminary injunction granted in its case Thursday, and the union’s president, Becky Pringle, said in a statement “today’s ruling allows educators and schools to continue to be guided by what’s best for students, not by the threat of illegal restrictions and punishment.”

The statement said President Donald Trump, billionaire head of the U.S. DOGE Service Elon Musk and Education Secretary Linda McMahon were responsible for an “attack” on public education.

“The fact is that Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and Linda McMahon are using politically motivated attacks and harmful and vague directives to stifle speech and erase critical lessons to attack public education, as they work to dismantle public schools,” Pringle said. “This is why educators, parents, and community leaders are organizing, mobilizing, and using every tool available to protect our students and their futures.”

The Education Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday.

Letter raised questions

In the February letter, Trainor offered a wide-ranging interpretation of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2023 involving Harvard University and the University of North Carolina, which struck down the use of affirmative action in college admissions.

Trainor wrote that though the ruling “addressed admissions decisions, the Supreme Court’s holding applies more broadly.”

The four-page letter raised a slew of questions for schools across pre-K through college over what fell within the requirements, and the department later released a Frequently Asked Questions document on the letter in an attempt to provide more guidance.

Earlier this month, the Education Department gave state education leaders just days to certify all K-12 schools in their states were complying with the letter in order to keep receiving federal financial assistance. The department and the groups suing in the New Hampshire case later reached an agreement that paused enforcement. 

People move about the Guilford County Democratic Party headquarters in Greensboro, North Carolina, on Nov. 7, 2022. (Photo by Sean Rayford/Getty Images)

The Democratic National Committee will transfer more than $1 million per month to its state and territorial parties over the next four years in an effort to build state-level infrastructure and operations, the DNC announced Thursday.

The agreement marks the DNC’s largest total investment in Democratic state parties to date and comes as Democrats try to rebound from significant losses in the 2024 election cycle.

Each state party is set to receive a minimum of $17,500 per month, a $5,000 increase from the current baseline, the DNC said in materials provided to States Newsroom ahead of the wider announcement.

Republican-controlled states will get an additional $5,000 a month, bringing their monthly total to $22,500. The GOP-controlled states will get that additional investment through the DNC’s Red State Fund.

The DNC’s definition for a GOP-controlled state is one that meets at least two of the three criteria: no Democratic governor or Democratic U.S. Senator; one-quarter or less of the congressional delegation is made up of Democrats; and Republicans hold supermajorities in both state legislative chambers.

As part of the agreement, the DNC said it will host six regional training “bootcamps” for state parties per two-year cycle and will also hire new staff to the Association of State Democratic Committees.

The DNC said the initiative also aims to help Democratic state parties with their infrastructure, staffing, data and tech operations as well as with organizing programs and preparation for future election cycles.

DNC Chair Ken Martin, the former Minnesota party chair who was elected to lead the national party in February, called the initiative “a historic political investment unlike anything Democrats have done in modern times” and said in a statement it is part of a long-term strategy.

“We’re putting our money where our mouth is to equip state parties with what they need to reach working families who deserve better, build long-term success all across the ballot, and gain electoral ground for years to come,” Martin said in the statement.

“Elections are won in states — and that’s exactly where we will be investing our resources,” said Martin.

Last week, Martin laid out the leadership board’s organizing principles, which centered on “organizing early, organizing always, organizing everywhere, and winning everywhere.”

“You’re going to continue to witness a level of aggressive investment and organizing from this DNC that’s unlike anything we’ve done before,” Martin wrote in that memo.

In a Thursday statement, Jane Kleeb, president of the Association of State Democratic Committees and chair of the Nebraska Democratic Party, said “state parties are the backbone of the Democratic Party, and through this investment, our state parties will receive the support they need to show voters that, no matter where they live, there is a strong Democratic Party in their corner, protecting their rights and economic opportunity against Republican attacks.”

20 years later

The strategy bears some resemblance to the 50-state strategy pioneered by former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, who led the DNC from 2005 to 2009 and appeared on a DNC press call Thursday.

“This is a really critical move that’s being made here,” Dean said. “We have not been anything but a Washington, D.C.-centric party since 2008, and the reason that the Democrats have had a tough time is because if you’re not out there doing the grassroots politics, you don’t win. Period.”

Critics during Dean’s tenure argued that spending in deep-red areas pulled resources away from winnable races in more moderate states and congressional districts.

Asked on the press call whether the push to spread money to more states could lead to a decline in financial support to swing states, Martin said, “No, not at all.”

“I mean, as I said, there’s no such thing as a perpetual blue state or a perpetual red state, and over the years, because there’s been a lack of investment in blue states, as an example, by other partners in the ecosystem, not necessarily the DNC, it’s meant we’ve seen actually our vote share in some of the bluest parts of the country actually starting to decrease,” he said.

“I believe you have to invest everywhere and organize everywhere if you want to win everywhere, and so, that’s what this will do.” 

People move about the Guilford County Democratic Party headquarters in Greensboro, North Carolina, on Nov. 7, 2022. (Photo by Sean Rayford/Getty Images)

The Democratic National Committee will transfer more than $1 million per month to its state and territorial parties over the next four years in an effort to build state-level infrastructure and operations, the DNC announced Thursday.

The agreement marks the DNC’s largest total investment in Democratic state parties to date and comes as Democrats try to rebound from significant losses in the 2024 election cycle.

Each state party is set to receive a minimum of $17,500 per month, a $5,000 increase from the current baseline, the DNC said in materials provided to States Newsroom ahead of the wider announcement.

Republican-controlled states will get an additional $5,000 a month, bringing their monthly total to $22,500. The GOP-controlled states will get that additional investment through the DNC’s Red State Fund.

The DNC’s definition for a GOP-controlled state is one that meets at least two of the three criteria: no Democratic governor or Democratic U.S. Senator; one-quarter or less of the congressional delegation is made up of Democrats; and Republicans hold supermajorities in both state legislative chambers.

As part of the agreement, the DNC said it will host six regional training “bootcamps” for state parties per two-year cycle and will also hire new staff to the Association of State Democratic Committees.

The DNC said the initiative also aims to help Democratic state parties with their infrastructure, staffing, data and tech operations as well as with organizing programs and preparation for future election cycles.

DNC Chair Ken Martin, the former Minnesota party chair who was elected to lead the national party in February, called the initiative “a historic political investment unlike anything Democrats have done in modern times” and said in a statement it is part of a long-term strategy.

“We’re putting our money where our mouth is to equip state parties with what they need to reach working families who deserve better, build long-term success all across the ballot, and gain electoral ground for years to come,” Martin said in the statement.

“Elections are won in states — and that’s exactly where we will be investing our resources,” said Martin.

Last week, Martin laid out the leadership board’s organizing principles, which centered on “organizing early, organizing always, organizing everywhere, and winning everywhere.”

“You’re going to continue to witness a level of aggressive investment and organizing from this DNC that’s unlike anything we’ve done before,” Martin wrote in that memo.

In a Thursday statement, Jane Kleeb, president of the Association of State Democratic Committees and chair of the Nebraska Democratic Party, said “state parties are the backbone of the Democratic Party, and through this investment, our state parties will receive the support they need to show voters that, no matter where they live, there is a strong Democratic Party in their corner, protecting their rights and economic opportunity against Republican attacks.”

20 years later

The strategy bears some resemblance to the 50-state strategy pioneered by former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, who led the DNC from 2005 to 2009 and appeared on a DNC press call Thursday.

“This is a really critical move that’s being made here,” Dean said. “We have not been anything but a Washington, D.C.-centric party since 2008, and the reason that the Democrats have had a tough time is because if you’re not out there doing the grassroots politics, you don’t win. Period.”

Critics during Dean’s tenure argued that spending in deep-red areas pulled resources away from winnable races in more moderate states and congressional districts.

Asked on the press call whether the push to spread money to more states could lead to a decline in financial support to swing states, Martin said, “No, not at all.”

“I mean, as I said, there’s no such thing as a perpetual blue state or a perpetual red state, and over the years, because there’s been a lack of investment in blue states, as an example, by other partners in the ecosystem, not necessarily the DNC, it’s meant we’ve seen actually our vote share in some of the bluest parts of the country actually starting to decrease,” he said.

“I believe you have to invest everywhere and organize everywhere if you want to win everywhere, and so, that’s what this will do.” 

President Donald Trump speaks to reporters after signing executive orders in the Oval Office on April 23, 2025. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer and Secretary of Education Linda McMahon look on. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump signed a series of education-focused orders Wednesday related to accreditation in higher education, school discipline policies, historically Black colleges and universities, artificial intelligence in education and workforce development.

The executive orders are the latest in a slew of efforts from Trump to dramatically reshape the federal role in education. Last month, Trump called on U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure” of her own agency.

In one executive order, Trump aims to “overhaul” college accreditation, setting up more of a clash between his administration and higher education as they look to reform the system responsible for ensuring institutions meet quality standards.

The order directs McMahon to hold accreditors accountable by “denial, monitoring, suspension, or termination of accreditation recognition, for accreditors’ poor performance or violations of federal civil rights law,” according to a White House fact sheet.

The order also directs McMahon and Attorney General Pam Bondi to “investigate and take action to terminate unlawful discrimination by American higher education institutions, including law schools and medical schools.”

During his presidential campaign, Trump pledged to fire “radical Left accreditors,” claiming they “have allowed our colleges to become dominated by Marxist Maniacs and lunatics.”

AI in education

Trump also signed an executive order aimed at advancing artificial intelligence in education. The order calls for a White House task force on AI education that will help agencies implement a “Presidential AI Challenge” and establish public-private partnerships to provide resources for AI education in K-12 schools.

The order also directs McMahon to “prioritize the use of AI in discretionary grant programs for teacher training and directs the Director of the National Science Foundation (NSF) to prioritize research on the use of AI in education,” according to a White House fact sheet.

The order also calls for Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, by collaborating with the director of the National Science Foundation, to “work with State and local workforce organizations and training providers to identify and promote high-quality AI skills education coursework and certifications across the country.”

Job training

Another order directs McMahon, Chavez-DeRemer and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to “modernize American workforce programs to prepare citizens for the high-paying skilled trade jobs of the future,” according to a White House fact sheet.

The order asks the Cabinet members to review federal workforce programs and refocus programs to train workers in industrial manufacturing.

Trump and Lutnick framed the order as part of the administration’s moves this month to place tariffs on every trading partner, with particularly high levies on goods from China.

“All those factories that you’re bringing in because of your trade policy, we’re going to train people” to work in them, Lutnick said.

Following the signings, Trump took several questions on his tariffs policy, acknowledging the rate on China was “high” but saying that was by design to hurt Chinese manufacturers.

“It basically means China is not doing any business with us, essentially, because it’s a very high number,” he said. “So when you add that to the price of a product, you know, a lot of those products aren’t going to sell, but China is not doing any business.”

Other orders

Other education-related executive orders signed Wednesday include: 

• An order that makes school discipline policies centered on “objective behavior;”
• an order mandating “full and timely disclosure of foreign funding by higher education institutions;”
• an order establishing a White House initiative on historically Black colleges and universities, or HBCUs, and a “President’s Board of Advisors on HBCUs” within the Education Department. 

President Donald Trump signs executive orders in the Oval Office of the White House on Jan. 20, 2025. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Only refugees who were closest to arriving in the United States are covered by an order the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued last month partially blocking the Trump administration from suspending the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, the court clarified in a filing Monday.

A three-judge panel wrote that its earlier order only pertains to people whom immigration officials had conditionally approved as refugees before Jan. 20 and had arranged travel to the United States.

The March order from the Ninth Circuit panel upheld part of a Washington state federal judge’s order blocking President Donald Trump’s day-one executive order suspending the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program.

The Trump administration sought clarification on the appeals court’s March order. The higher court had denied part of the administration’s request to halt the lower court’s earlier preliminary injunction.

On Monday, the appeals court panel said the government and the refugee advocacy groups challenging Trump’s executive order had overstated what the panel’s March order required.

Rather than admit all of the roughly 130,000 conditionally approved refugees, as the government claimed, or “tens of thousands” of refugees the groups said the order applied to, the court only required the government to allow those who “needed only to complete their arranged travel to the United States.”

“Under these definitions, the parties have construed our carveout broadly enough to swallow the entire stay order,” the judges wrote Monday.

The judges used the example of a refugee family in Kenya that was forced to shelter in the parking lot of the U.S. embassy in Nairobi after their travel was abruptly canceled as the type of people who would still be allowed to settle in the United States under the March order.

Inauguration Day order

Consistent with the Jan. 20 executive order, the administration withheld funds appropriated by Congress for those services — drawing swift legal action.

The International Refugee Assistance Project filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, Church World Service, Lutheran Community Services Northwest and several refugees and others impacted by the order in February.

In its March order, the appeals court denied the administration’s motion “to the extent the district court’s preliminary injunction order applies to individuals who were conditionally approved for refugee status by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services before January 20, 2025.”

“The preliminary injunction remains in effect for these individuals only, and the government must resume their processing, facilitation of travel to the United States, admission, and provision of resettlement benefits after admission,” the judges wrote Monday.

The panel noted that when it issued the order in March, it “did not define conditional approval.”

Melissa Keaney, senior supervising attorney in the litigation department at the International Refugee Assistance Project, said “the Ninth Circuit reiterated that the U.S. government must end the state of limbo for refugees like our client Pacito who were ready to travel and had their lives turned upside down by President Trump’s suspension of the refugee program,’’ in a statement shared with States Newsroom.

“We will hold the government accountable to actually process those refugees immediately, and we will continue to defend the refugee program as a whole in court,” Keaney said. 

Opponents of President Donald Trump’s executive order indefinitely halting refugee resettlement in the U.S. rally on the steps of the federal courthouse in Seattle on Feb. 25, 2025, after a judge issued a ruling blocking the president’s order. (Photo by Jake Goldstein-Street/Washington State Standard)

WASHINGTON — State and local leaders and advocates from across the country called on the Trump administration Monday to immediately restart the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, saying the program’s suspension has harmed communities.

President Donald Trump signed an order suspending the program on his first day back in office and the administration withheld funds appropriated by Congress for those services. Federal courts have partially rejected that order, but the Trump administration has still not resumed the program, the advocates said.

By indefinitely halting the program and subsequently defunding its infrastructure, Trump “stranded” more than 100,000 refugees “who had already been interviewed by Homeland Security and received written notices from the U.S. government that they were eligible for resettlement,” Mark Hetfield, president of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, or HIAS, said at a press conference hosted by several refugee advocacy groups Monday.

‘More than a program’

Aisha Koroma, a Refugee Congress delegate for Washington, D.C., said the Refugee Admissions Program “is more than a program.” Refugee Congress is a national organization advocating for people who are forcibly displaced. 

“It represents lives, dreams, resilience, hope — it is a gateway for future change-makers, doctors, engineers, artists, tradespeople — people who are ready and eager to become assets to America’s workforce and to contribute meaningfully to its economy and communities,” Koroma said. 

“Pausing this program doesn’t just delay paperwork, it delays possibilities, it ensures tragedies, it tears families apart, and it leaves people vulnerable, but most importantly, it sends a painful message that America is closing its doors, not only to those who need it most, but also those who fill jobs, those who open stores and people who sat on our school boards,” Koroma added.

Rev. Noel Andersen, national field director at Church World Service and faith leader with the United Church of Christ, said the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program “has signified a space of refuge and hope for the world as a beacon of light for democracy.”

“Now, because of the increased discriminatory attacks on all immigrants, including refugees, we’re in a dire place for this program, even as it is clearly represented in our laws written by Congress and with a recent court order to resume the refugee program, yet it has not happened, and now our own democracy is in danger,” he said.

Legal challenge ongoing

The International Refugee Assistance Project filed a lawsuit on behalf of HIAS, Church World Service, Lutheran Community Services Northwest and refugees impacted by the order in February.

A federal judge in Washington state granted a nationwide injunction in February requested by the groups who challenged Trump’s executive order suspending the program and the withholding of funds for those services.

The faith groups then asked the federal judge for an emergency hearing after the U.S. State Department terminated their contracts despite the earlier injunction. The court ordered in March that the administration offer a status report on their efforts to resume the processing of refugees.

The administration quickly appealed the judge’s subsequent order requiring the State Department to restore contracts to nonprofits that help with resettling refugees. An appeals court denied part of the administration’s request to halt the lower court’s earlier preliminary injunction. 

The federal judge on April 11 granted the groups’ motion to enforce the first preliminary injunction issued. 

Hetfield said the administration defied the February injunction effectively ordering the administration to restart the program and the federal appeals court upholding the part of that order focused on admitting more than 100,000 conditionally approved refugees.

“Yet two months later, the administration has continued to defy the court order, noting in its filings last week that it intends to admit only a fraction of a fraction of conditionally approved refugees, and, in fact, has taken no visible steps yet to even do that,” he said.

Trump’s January executive order also instructed officials at the State and Homeland Security departments to submit a report to Trump 90 days from the order — April 20 — “regarding whether resumption of entry of refugees into the United States under the (U.S. Refugee Admissions Program) would be in the interests of the United States.”

Trump also instructed the departments to submit further reports every 90 days thereafter until he determines that resumption of the program “is in the interests of the United States.”

Advocates said Monday they have yet to hear whether the administration’s first 90-day report regarding the potential resumption of the program was delivered to the White House.

Asked for a comment on the issue, a White House spokesperson acknowledged receiving the inquiry but did not immediately provide a substantive response.

U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon speaks at a press conference organized by House Democrats outside the U.S. Department of Education headquarters in Washington, D.C., on April 2, 2025. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Education said Monday that it will resume collections May 5 for defaulted federal student loans.

After pausing during the early weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic, the agency has not collected on defaulted loans in over five years. More than 5 million borrowers sit in default on their federal student loans, and just 38% of borrowers are current on their payments, the department said.

“American taxpayers will no longer be forced to serve as collateral for irresponsible student loan policies,” U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said in a statement Monday.

During last year’s presidential campaign, President Donald Trump criticized his predecessor and successor, President Joe Biden, for his efforts to erase student debt. McMahon resumed that line of attack Monday, blaming Biden’s administration for unreasonably raising borrowers’ expectations of forgiveness.

“The Biden Administration misled borrowers: the executive branch does not have the constitutional authority to wipe debt away, nor do the loan balances simply disappear. Hundreds of billions have already been transferred to taxpayers,” McMahon said.

She added that “going forward, the Department of Education, in conjunction with the Department of Treasury, will shepherd the student loan program responsibly and according to the law, which means helping borrowers return to repayment — both for the sake of their own financial health and our nation’s economic outlook.”

The department said the Office of Federal Student Aid will restart the Treasury Offset Program, which the U.S. Treasury Department administers, on May 5.

The Education Department statement said all borrowers who are in default will get emails over the next two weeks “making them aware of these developments and urging them to contact the Default Resolution Group to make a monthly payment, enroll in an income-driven repayment plan, or sign up for loan rehabilitation.”

The department said the Office of Federal Student Aid will “send required notices beginning administrative wage garnishment” later this summer.

More than 42.7 million borrowers owe more than $1.6 trillion in student debt, according to the department. 

The administration claims that “instead of protecting responsible taxpayers, the Biden-Harris Administration put them on the hook for irresponsible lending, pushing the federal student loan portfolio toward a fiscal cliff.” 

U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen, right, meets with Maryland resident Kilmar Abrego Garcia in El Salvador on April 17, 2025. Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat, had been seeking a meeting with Abrego Garcia after the administration said it mistakenly deported him to a mega-prison in his home country. (Photo via Van Hollen on X.)

This story was updated at 6:01 p.m. Eastern.

Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, the Maryland resident the Trump administration erroneously deported to his native El Salvador, appeared to be in good health and had been moved from a notorious mega-prison to another detention center, as his case tests the limits of executive power to override due process rights in the United States, Sen. Chris Van Hollen told reporters Friday.

Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat, met Thursday with Abrego Garcia and briefed reporters on the visit after landing Friday afternoon at Dulles International Airport outside Washington, D.C.

The meeting with Van Hollen was Abrego Garcia’s first contact outside of the U.S. and El Salvador immigration and legal systems since he was deported in March, the senator said.

“His conversation with me was the first communication he’d had with anybody outside a prison since he was abducted,” Van Hollen said Friday. 

Accompanied by Abrego Garcia’s wife, mother and brother at Dulles, Van Hollen said he’d been preparing to catch his plane out of El Salvador Thursday evening when he got word from the U.S. embassy that he would be able to meet with Abrego Garcia.

The meeting came at the end of Van Hollen’s second day in the country, where he faced difficulties securing an in-person meeting or phone call with the Salvadoran citizen. The second-term senator traveled to the Central American country this week to urge the Salvadoran government to release Abrego Garcia and to meet with him.

Abrego Garcia told Van Hollen he’d been taken to a detention center in Baltimore, Van Hollen said Friday. From there, he was transported to Texas and then flown to El Salvador, where he was detained at the notorious mega-prison Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT.

Abrego Garcia was moved on April 9 from CECOT to another El Salvador detention center, Van Hollen reported. The conditions at the new prison were better, but Abrego Garcia was still denied access to the outside world, including communication with his family or lawyers, which is a violation of international law, Van Hollen said.

The meeting occurred under close supervision from Salvadoran officials, Van Hollen said, but Abrego Garcia appeared in adequate health.

“On a very cursory examination, he appeared OK,” Van Hollen said.

Van Hollen on Thursday shared a picture on social media of his meeting with Abrego Garcia, who appeared in civilian clothes.

Constitutional conflict

While he said Abrego Garcia’s individual case was tragic, Van Hollen said it had even larger implications for the strength of constitutional rights to due process.

“This should not be an issue for Republicans or Democrats,” he said. “This is an issue for every American who cares about our Constitution, who cares about personal liberty, who cares about due process and who cares about what makes America so different, which is adherence to all of those things. This is an American issue.”

Noting that the administration has ignored federal courts at every level — including a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last week that President Donald Trump’s administration must “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return to the United States — Van Hollen said officials at the U.S. embassy in El Salvador told him they had not received any instruction from the administration to seek his release.

“It’s very clear that the president, the Trump administration, are blatantly, flagrantly disagreeing with, defying, the order from the Supreme Court,” he said.

White House says ‘he’s NOT coming back’

The Trump administration, which has admitted in court that Abrego Garcia’s deportation stemmed from an “administrative error,” continued Friday to be steadfast in refusing to return him.

The Trump administration has criticized Van Hollen’s advocacy for Abrego Garcia, and the White House targeted the senator on social media Friday.

“Oh, and by the way, @ChrisVanHollen — he’s NOT coming back,” a post on X from the official White House account read. The post included an illustration of a New York Times headline on the meeting, with two sections crossed out and replaced with administration claims about Abrego Garcia. 

The administration has claimed there are logistical reasons it cannot repatriate Abrego Garcia, but some — including a Reagan-appointed federal appeals court judge on Thursday — have said the executive branch is defying the Supreme Court order.

Payments to El Salvador

Van Hollen said the Trump administration has promised to pay El Salvador up to $15 million to detain the prisoners, but noted that Democrats in the U.S. Senate are not “totally powerless” to stop those payments.

“Appropriations need to go through the Congress, and that $15 million, you can be sure we’re going to be looking for where it is because that wasn’t authorized in previous appropriations,” he said.

He said that while Democrats are in the minority in both houses of Congress, they could block any Senate funding bill that included payments for detention in El Salvador.

“You can be sure that I won’t support the use of one penny of taxpayer dollars to keep Abrego Garcia illegally detained in El Salvador,” he said. 

Prisoners look out of their cell as Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem tours the Terrorist Confinement Center, or CECOT, on March 26, 2025 in Tecoluca, El Salvador. (Photo by Alex Brandon-Pool/Getty Images)

U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen said Thursday that soldiers blocked him from entering a notorious mega-prison in El Salvador where the erroneously deported Maryland resident Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia has been held for more than a month.

The Maryland Democrat arrived in the Central American country Wednesday in an effort to help bring Abrego Garcia, whom the Justice Department admitted in court was deported in error, back to the United States, or at least check on his wellness. He met with El Salvador Vice President Félix Ulloa that day, who denied his requests to either visit or speak on the phone with Abrego Garcia.

Van Hollen told reporters Thursday afternoon that he again tried to make contact with Abrego Garcia that morning.

A U.S. immigration judge issued a protective order in 2019 finding that sending Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran citizen, back to his home country would put him in grave danger.

Accompanied by Chris Newman — the lawyer for Abrego Garcia’s wife and his mother — Van Hollen said they tried to enter Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT, but soldiers stopped them at a checkpoint about three kilometers from the prison.

“We were told by the soldiers that they’d been ordered not to allow us to proceed any further than that point,” Van Hollen said.

Van Hollen said that since Abrego Garcia was sent to CECOT, he has not spoken with anyone outside of the prison walls, and “this inability to communicate with his lawyers is a violation of international law.”

The senator pointed out that El Salvador is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

“That covenant says, and I quote, ‘A detained or imprisoned person shall be entitled to communicate and consult with his legal counsel,’” he said.

Van Hollen also said he met with the U.S. Embassy in El Salvador and they discussed “the full range of important bilateral relations between the United States and El Salvador.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt and other Republicans have criticized Van Hollen for making the trip, repeating the accusation that Abrego Garcia is a gang member.

Representatives for the White House and DHS did not respond to messages seeking comment Thursday.

Appeals court slams administration’s inaction

Meanwhile, Abrego Garcia’s case continues to work its way through U.S. courts as a flashpoint conflict between two branches of government that has led to the precipice of a constitutional crisis.

On Thursday, a federal appeals court panel dismantled the administration’s latest appeal, saying the government had done “essentially nothing” to attempt to return Abrego Garcia in compliance with last week’s Supreme Court order.

A three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit said the executive branch was due deference in conducting foreign policy, but that the administration’s inaction in seeking Abrego Garcia’s return amounted to defiance of a judicial order.

The unanimous ruling was written by Fourth Circuit Chief Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III, who was nominated by Republican President Ronald Reagan. The other two judges, Robert Bruce King and Stephanie Thacker, were nominated by Democratic presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

“The government is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process that is the foundation of our constitutional order. Further, it claims in essence that because it has rid itself of custody that there is nothing that can be done,” the panel wrote. “This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear.”

The appeals ruling responded to the government’s appeal of U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis’ order this week for the Trump administration to offer evidence on how it has sought to help with Abrego Garcia’s release from CECOT.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last week that the Trump administration must “facilitate” — but stopped short of requiring — his return to the United States.

In unusually frank language, the Fourth Circuit panel warned Thursday the conflict between the executive and judicial branches threatened the foundation of U.S. government.

“If today the Executive claims the right to deport without due process and in disregard of court orders, what assurance will there be tomorrow that it will not deport American citizens and then disclaim responsibility to bring them home?” the court asked. “And what assurance shall there be that the Executive will not train its broad discretionary powers upon its political enemies? The threat, even if not the actuality, would always be present.”

Near the end of the order, the panel urged the administration to obey the judicial branch.

“We yet cling to the hope that it is not naïve to believe our good brethren in the Executive Branch perceive the rule of law as vital to the American ethos,” the judges wrote. “This case presents their unique chance to vindicate that value and to summon the best that is within us while there is still time.”

Neither country taking action

The Fourth Circuit panel pointed out that the leaders of both the United States and El Salvador claimed they had no power to return Abrego Garcia.

“We are told that neither government has the power to act,” they wrote. “The result will be to leave matters generally and Abrego Garcia specifically in an interminable limbo without recourse to law of any sort.”

During a White House visit this week, El Salvador President Nayib Bukele said he would not bring Abrego Garcia back to the United States.

The Trump administration has admitted in court that Abrego Garcia’s deportation stemmed from an “administrative error.” The administration continues to accuse him of being part of the gang MS-13, despite no charges or convictions of any criminal offenses against him, including gang-related crimes.

Jacob Fischler contributed to this report.

Solar panels in Damariscotta, Maine. (Photo by Evan Houk/ Maine Morning Star)

WASHINGTON — The legal battle over a Biden-era climate program ramped up late Wednesday when an appeals court halted a federal judge’s ruling requiring the disbursement of those funds.

The ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit will keep funds frozen in Citibank accounts while a federal suit over the program is ongoing.

The appeals court order reversed a preliminary injunction that U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan of the District of Columbia issued Tuesday that temporarily barred the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from “unlawfully suspending or terminating” grant awards.

The appeals panel said it had not had access to Chutkan’s opinion explaining her order granting an injunction — which came a day after the order itself — and the trial judge had therefore not met the high bar needed to issue a preliminary injunction. The panel’s order “should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits,” the judges said.

“The purpose of this order is to give the court sufficient opportunity to consider the district court’s forthcoming opinion in support of its order granting a preliminary injunction together with” the government’s appeal, the judges wrote.

Chutkan issued her opinion the day after granting the preliminary injunction, pointing out that “for weeks, despite repeated inquiries to Citibank and EPA, Plaintiffs received little to no communication from EPA or Citibank regarding their inability to access their funds.”

“Overnight, billions of dollars appropriated by Congress were frozen. As a result, nationwide projects were halted, workplans were disrupted, and millions of dollars in approved transactions with committed partners could not be disbursed,” she wrote.

On Thursday, the D.C. Circuit panel asked the government to refile its argument responding to Chutkan’s opinion by 5 p.m. Eastern on Saturday.

Fight over funding

Climate United Fund and other organizations sued President Donald Trump’s administration and Citibank in March over money frozen in the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund.

The $27 billion initiative, which provides funding to organizations building for energy-efficient projects and other measures to tackle climate change, was authorized by Congress as part of the Inflation Reduction Act that Democrats passed along party lines and President Joe Biden signed into law in 2022.

Chutkan’s order blocked the administration from “directly or indirectly impeding” Citibank or causing the bank to “deny, obstruct, delay, or otherwise limit access to funds in accounts established in connection with” the organizations’ grants.

The Trump administration quickly challenged that ruling Wednesday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

The higher court temporarily blocked Chutkan’s decision “pending further order.”

The appeals court’s ruling halts Chutkan’s preliminary injunction to the extent that it “enables or requires Citibank to release, disburse, transfer, otherwise move, or allow access to funds.”

The higher court also prevented the Trump administration from having to file a status report with the district court within 24 hours of the preliminary injunction’s entry that confirmed their compliance, as outlined in Chutkan’s ruling.

The appeals court also ordered that “no party take any action, directly or indirectly, with regard to the disputed contracts, grants, awards or funds.”

The EPA said in March it would be terminating $20 billion in grants under the program, and the agency’s administrator Lee Zeldin described the climate initiative as a “gold bar” scheme.

Climate United Fund did not immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday, and the EPA declined to comment. 

Protesters outside the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland in Greenbelt rally on April 4, 2025, in support of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a Maryland father who was deported to El Salvador in an “administrative error,” calling for him to be returned to the U.S. (Photo by Ariana Figueroa/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen said Wednesday he was denied a meeting with Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, an El Salvador-born Maryland resident who was mistakenly deported to a mega-prison in his home country notorious for human rights abuses.

The Maryland Democrat met with El Salvador Vice President Félix Ulloa in the Central American country in an effort to help bring Abrego Garcia back to the United States. Abrego Garcia is a citizen of El Salvador, but a U.S. immigration judge issued a protective order in 2019 finding that sending him back to his home country would put him in grave danger.

After meeting with Ulloa, Van Hollen briefed reporters on the visit and said the Salvadoran vice president rebuffed his requests for contact with Abrego Garcia.

“I asked the vice president if I could meet with Mr. Abrego Garcia and he said, ‘Well, you need to make earlier provisions to go visit CECOT (Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo),’” Van Hollen told reporters in El Salvador, referring to the mega-prison.

“I said, ‘I’m not interested, at this moment, in taking a tour of CECOT, I just want to meet with Mr. Abrego Garcia,’” Van Hollen said.

“He said he was not able to make that happen. He said he’d need a little more time. I asked him if I came back next week, whether I’d be able to see Mr. Abrego Garcia. He said he couldn’t promise that either,” the senator added. 

Van Hollen said he was also denied a phone or video call with Abrego Garcia to ask how he was doing and report that information to his family. 

The senator said he would contact the U.S. Embassy in El Salvador and request they ask the government of El Salvador to connect the two of them via phone, following a suggestion from Ulloa.

Van Hollen’s visit came a day after a federal judge in Maryland ordered the Trump administration to offer evidence on how it has sought to help with Abrego Garcia’s release from CECOT.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last week that the Trump administration must “facilitate” — but did not require — his return to the United States. El Salvador President Nayib Bukele also said Monday that he would not bring Abrego Garcia back to the United States.

The Trump administration has acknowledged in court that Abrego Garcia was deported due to an “administrative error.”

The administration accused him of being a member of the gang MS-13. He has not been charged or convicted of any criminal offenses, including gang-related crimes.

Van Hollen, noting that the Trump administration “illegally abducted” Abrego Garcia, said he “won’t stop trying” to get the wrongly deported man out of the prison and back to Maryland and predicted others would follow.

“I can assure the president, the vice president, that I may be the first United States senator to visit El Salvador on this issue, but there will be more, and there will be more members of Congress coming,” he said.

Administration responds

Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security posted on social media Wednesday a copy of a restraining order Abrego Garcia’s wife sought against him in 2021 “claiming he punched, scratched, and ripped off her shirt, among other harm.”

In response, Abrego Garcia’s wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura, told Newsweek she had a disagreement with him, but that things did not escalate and she did not continue with the civil court process. 

Late Wednesday afternoon, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt made a statement on the case, displaying the restraining order, repeating the accusation Abrego Garcia is a gang member and objecting to media references to him as a “Maryland father.”

“There is no Maryland father,” she said.

Patty Morin, the mother of a Maryland woman slain by a Salvadoran immigrant in the country without legal status, also appeared at the briefing and spoke in favor of the Trump administration’s aggressive deportation actions.

President Donald Trump speaks to reporters after signing executive orders in the Oval Office on April 23, 2025. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer and Secretary of Education Linda McMahon look on. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump signed a series of education-focused orders Wednesday related to accreditation in higher education, school discipline policies, historically Black colleges and universities, artificial intelligence in education and workforce development.

The executive orders are the latest in a slew of efforts from Trump to dramatically reshape the federal role in education. Last month, Trump called on U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure” of her own agency.

In one executive order, Trump aims to “overhaul” college accreditation, setting up more of a clash between his administration and higher education as they look to reform the system responsible for ensuring institutions meet quality standards.

The order directs McMahon to hold accreditors accountable by “denial, monitoring, suspension, or termination of accreditation recognition, for accreditors’ poor performance or violations of federal civil rights law,” according to a White House fact sheet.

The order also directs McMahon and Attorney General Pam Bondi to “investigate and take action to terminate unlawful discrimination by American higher education institutions, including law schools and medical schools.”

During his presidential campaign, Trump pledged to fire “radical Left accreditors,” claiming they “have allowed our colleges to become dominated by Marxist Maniacs and lunatics.”

AI in education

Trump also signed an executive order aimed at advancing artificial intelligence in education. The order calls for a White House task force on AI education that will help agencies implement a “Presidential AI Challenge” and establish public-private partnerships to provide resources for AI education in K-12 schools.

The order also directs McMahon to “prioritize the use of AI in discretionary grant programs for teacher training and directs the Director of the National Science Foundation (NSF) to prioritize research on the use of AI in education,” according to a White House fact sheet.

The order also calls for Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, by collaborating with the director of the National Science Foundation, to “work with State and local workforce organizations and training providers to identify and promote high-quality AI skills education coursework and certifications across the country.”

Job training

Another order directs McMahon, Chavez-DeRemer and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to “modernize American workforce programs to prepare citizens for the high-paying skilled trade jobs of the future,” according to a White House fact sheet.

The order asks the Cabinet members to review federal workforce programs and refocus programs to train workers in industrial manufacturing.

Trump and Lutnick framed the order as part of the administration’s moves this month to place tariffs on every trading partner, with particularly high levies on goods from China.

“All those factories that you’re bringing in because of your trade policy, we’re going to train people” to work in them, Lutnick said.

Following the signings, Trump took several questions on his tariffs policy, acknowledging the rate on China was “high” but saying that was by design to hurt Chinese manufacturers.

“It basically means China is not doing any business with us, essentially, because it’s a very high number,” he said. “So when you add that to the price of a product, you know, a lot of those products aren’t going to sell, but China is not doing any business.”

Other orders

Other education-related executive orders signed Wednesday include: 

• An order that makes school discipline policies centered on “objective behavior;”
• an order mandating “full and timely disclosure of foreign funding by higher education institutions;”
• an order establishing a White House initiative on historically Black colleges and universities, or HBCUs, and a “President’s Board of Advisors on HBCUs” within the Education Department. 

President Donald Trump signs executive orders in the Oval Office of the White House on Jan. 20, 2025. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Only refugees who were closest to arriving in the United States are covered by an order the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued last month partially blocking the Trump administration from suspending the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, the court clarified in a filing Monday.

A three-judge panel wrote that its earlier order only pertains to people whom immigration officials had conditionally approved as refugees before Jan. 20 and had arranged travel to the United States.

The March order from the Ninth Circuit panel upheld part of a Washington state federal judge’s order blocking President Donald Trump’s day-one executive order suspending the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program.

The Trump administration sought clarification on the appeals court’s March order. The higher court had denied part of the administration’s request to halt the lower court’s earlier preliminary injunction.

On Monday, the appeals court panel said the government and the refugee advocacy groups challenging Trump’s executive order had overstated what the panel’s March order required.

Rather than admit all of the roughly 130,000 conditionally approved refugees, as the government claimed, or “tens of thousands” of refugees the groups said the order applied to, the court only required the government to allow those who “needed only to complete their arranged travel to the United States.”

“Under these definitions, the parties have construed our carveout broadly enough to swallow the entire stay order,” the judges wrote Monday.

The judges used the example of a refugee family in Kenya that was forced to shelter in the parking lot of the U.S. embassy in Nairobi after their travel was abruptly canceled as the type of people who would still be allowed to settle in the United States under the March order.

Inauguration Day order

Consistent with the Jan. 20 executive order, the administration withheld funds appropriated by Congress for those services — drawing swift legal action.

The International Refugee Assistance Project filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, Church World Service, Lutheran Community Services Northwest and several refugees and others impacted by the order in February.

In its March order, the appeals court denied the administration’s motion “to the extent the district court’s preliminary injunction order applies to individuals who were conditionally approved for refugee status by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services before January 20, 2025.”

“The preliminary injunction remains in effect for these individuals only, and the government must resume their processing, facilitation of travel to the United States, admission, and provision of resettlement benefits after admission,” the judges wrote Monday.

The panel noted that when it issued the order in March, it “did not define conditional approval.”

Melissa Keaney, senior supervising attorney in the litigation department at the International Refugee Assistance Project, said “the Ninth Circuit reiterated that the U.S. government must end the state of limbo for refugees like our client Pacito who were ready to travel and had their lives turned upside down by President Trump’s suspension of the refugee program,’’ in a statement shared with States Newsroom.

“We will hold the government accountable to actually process those refugees immediately, and we will continue to defend the refugee program as a whole in court,” Keaney said. 

Opponents of President Donald Trump’s executive order indefinitely halting refugee resettlement in the U.S. rally on the steps of the federal courthouse in Seattle on Feb. 25, 2025, after a judge issued a ruling blocking the president’s order. (Photo by Jake Goldstein-Street/Washington State Standard)

WASHINGTON — State and local leaders and advocates from across the country called on the Trump administration Monday to immediately restart the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, saying the program’s suspension has harmed communities.

President Donald Trump signed an order suspending the program on his first day back in office and the administration withheld funds appropriated by Congress for those services. Federal courts have partially rejected that order, but the Trump administration has still not resumed the program, the advocates said.

By indefinitely halting the program and subsequently defunding its infrastructure, Trump “stranded” more than 100,000 refugees “who had already been interviewed by Homeland Security and received written notices from the U.S. government that they were eligible for resettlement,” Mark Hetfield, president of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, or HIAS, said at a press conference hosted by several refugee advocacy groups Monday.

‘More than a program’

Aisha Koroma, a Refugee Congress delegate for Washington, D.C., said the Refugee Admissions Program “is more than a program.” Refugee Congress is a national organization advocating for people who are forcibly displaced. 

“It represents lives, dreams, resilience, hope — it is a gateway for future change-makers, doctors, engineers, artists, tradespeople — people who are ready and eager to become assets to America’s workforce and to contribute meaningfully to its economy and communities,” Koroma said. 

“Pausing this program doesn’t just delay paperwork, it delays possibilities, it ensures tragedies, it tears families apart, and it leaves people vulnerable, but most importantly, it sends a painful message that America is closing its doors, not only to those who need it most, but also those who fill jobs, those who open stores and people who sat on our school boards,” Koroma added.

Rev. Noel Andersen, national field director at Church World Service and faith leader with the United Church of Christ, said the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program “has signified a space of refuge and hope for the world as a beacon of light for democracy.”

“Now, because of the increased discriminatory attacks on all immigrants, including refugees, we’re in a dire place for this program, even as it is clearly represented in our laws written by Congress and with a recent court order to resume the refugee program, yet it has not happened, and now our own democracy is in danger,” he said.

Legal challenge ongoing

The International Refugee Assistance Project filed a lawsuit on behalf of HIAS, Church World Service, Lutheran Community Services Northwest and refugees impacted by the order in February.

A federal judge in Washington state granted a nationwide injunction in February requested by the groups who challenged Trump’s executive order suspending the program and the withholding of funds for those services.

The faith groups then asked the federal judge for an emergency hearing after the U.S. State Department terminated their contracts despite the earlier injunction. The court ordered in March that the administration offer a status report on their efforts to resume the processing of refugees.

The administration quickly appealed the judge’s subsequent order requiring the State Department to restore contracts to nonprofits that help with resettling refugees. An appeals court denied part of the administration’s request to halt the lower court’s earlier preliminary injunction. 

The federal judge on April 11 granted the groups’ motion to enforce the first preliminary injunction issued. 

Hetfield said the administration defied the February injunction effectively ordering the administration to restart the program and the federal appeals court upholding the part of that order focused on admitting more than 100,000 conditionally approved refugees.

“Yet two months later, the administration has continued to defy the court order, noting in its filings last week that it intends to admit only a fraction of a fraction of conditionally approved refugees, and, in fact, has taken no visible steps yet to even do that,” he said.

Trump’s January executive order also instructed officials at the State and Homeland Security departments to submit a report to Trump 90 days from the order — April 20 — “regarding whether resumption of entry of refugees into the United States under the (U.S. Refugee Admissions Program) would be in the interests of the United States.”

Trump also instructed the departments to submit further reports every 90 days thereafter until he determines that resumption of the program “is in the interests of the United States.”

Advocates said Monday they have yet to hear whether the administration’s first 90-day report regarding the potential resumption of the program was delivered to the White House.

Asked for a comment on the issue, a White House spokesperson acknowledged receiving the inquiry but did not immediately provide a substantive response.

U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon speaks at a press conference organized by House Democrats outside the U.S. Department of Education headquarters in Washington, D.C., on April 2, 2025. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Education said Monday that it will resume collections May 5 for defaulted federal student loans.

After pausing during the early weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic, the agency has not collected on defaulted loans in over five years. More than 5 million borrowers sit in default on their federal student loans, and just 38% of borrowers are current on their payments, the department said.

“American taxpayers will no longer be forced to serve as collateral for irresponsible student loan policies,” U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said in a statement Monday.

During last year’s presidential campaign, President Donald Trump criticized his predecessor and successor, President Joe Biden, for his efforts to erase student debt. McMahon resumed that line of attack Monday, blaming Biden’s administration for unreasonably raising borrowers’ expectations of forgiveness.

“The Biden Administration misled borrowers: the executive branch does not have the constitutional authority to wipe debt away, nor do the loan balances simply disappear. Hundreds of billions have already been transferred to taxpayers,” McMahon said.

She added that “going forward, the Department of Education, in conjunction with the Department of Treasury, will shepherd the student loan program responsibly and according to the law, which means helping borrowers return to repayment — both for the sake of their own financial health and our nation’s economic outlook.”

The department said the Office of Federal Student Aid will restart the Treasury Offset Program, which the U.S. Treasury Department administers, on May 5.

The Education Department statement said all borrowers who are in default will get emails over the next two weeks “making them aware of these developments and urging them to contact the Default Resolution Group to make a monthly payment, enroll in an income-driven repayment plan, or sign up for loan rehabilitation.”

The department said the Office of Federal Student Aid will “send required notices beginning administrative wage garnishment” later this summer.

More than 42.7 million borrowers owe more than $1.6 trillion in student debt, according to the department. 

The administration claims that “instead of protecting responsible taxpayers, the Biden-Harris Administration put them on the hook for irresponsible lending, pushing the federal student loan portfolio toward a fiscal cliff.” 

U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen, right, meets with Maryland resident Kilmar Abrego Garcia in El Salvador on April 17, 2025. Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat, had been seeking a meeting with Abrego Garcia after the administration said it mistakenly deported him to a mega-prison in his home country. (Photo via Van Hollen on X.)

This story was updated at 6:01 p.m. Eastern.

Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, the Maryland resident the Trump administration erroneously deported to his native El Salvador, appeared to be in good health and had been moved from a notorious mega-prison to another detention center, as his case tests the limits of executive power to override due process rights in the United States, Sen. Chris Van Hollen told reporters Friday.

Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat, met Thursday with Abrego Garcia and briefed reporters on the visit after landing Friday afternoon at Dulles International Airport outside Washington, D.C.

The meeting with Van Hollen was Abrego Garcia’s first contact outside of the U.S. and El Salvador immigration and legal systems since he was deported in March, the senator said.

“His conversation with me was the first communication he’d had with anybody outside a prison since he was abducted,” Van Hollen said Friday. 

Accompanied by Abrego Garcia’s wife, mother and brother at Dulles, Van Hollen said he’d been preparing to catch his plane out of El Salvador Thursday evening when he got word from the U.S. embassy that he would be able to meet with Abrego Garcia.

The meeting came at the end of Van Hollen’s second day in the country, where he faced difficulties securing an in-person meeting or phone call with the Salvadoran citizen. The second-term senator traveled to the Central American country this week to urge the Salvadoran government to release Abrego Garcia and to meet with him.

Abrego Garcia told Van Hollen he’d been taken to a detention center in Baltimore, Van Hollen said Friday. From there, he was transported to Texas and then flown to El Salvador, where he was detained at the notorious mega-prison Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT.

Abrego Garcia was moved on April 9 from CECOT to another El Salvador detention center, Van Hollen reported. The conditions at the new prison were better, but Abrego Garcia was still denied access to the outside world, including communication with his family or lawyers, which is a violation of international law, Van Hollen said.

The meeting occurred under close supervision from Salvadoran officials, Van Hollen said, but Abrego Garcia appeared in adequate health.

“On a very cursory examination, he appeared OK,” Van Hollen said.

Van Hollen on Thursday shared a picture on social media of his meeting with Abrego Garcia, who appeared in civilian clothes.

Constitutional conflict

While he said Abrego Garcia’s individual case was tragic, Van Hollen said it had even larger implications for the strength of constitutional rights to due process.

“This should not be an issue for Republicans or Democrats,” he said. “This is an issue for every American who cares about our Constitution, who cares about personal liberty, who cares about due process and who cares about what makes America so different, which is adherence to all of those things. This is an American issue.”

Noting that the administration has ignored federal courts at every level — including a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last week that President Donald Trump’s administration must “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return to the United States — Van Hollen said officials at the U.S. embassy in El Salvador told him they had not received any instruction from the administration to seek his release.

“It’s very clear that the president, the Trump administration, are blatantly, flagrantly disagreeing with, defying, the order from the Supreme Court,” he said.

White House says ‘he’s NOT coming back’

The Trump administration, which has admitted in court that Abrego Garcia’s deportation stemmed from an “administrative error,” continued Friday to be steadfast in refusing to return him.

The Trump administration has criticized Van Hollen’s advocacy for Abrego Garcia, and the White House targeted the senator on social media Friday.

“Oh, and by the way, @ChrisVanHollen — he’s NOT coming back,” a post on X from the official White House account read. The post included an illustration of a New York Times headline on the meeting, with two sections crossed out and replaced with administration claims about Abrego Garcia. 

The administration has claimed there are logistical reasons it cannot repatriate Abrego Garcia, but some — including a Reagan-appointed federal appeals court judge on Thursday — have said the executive branch is defying the Supreme Court order.

Payments to El Salvador

Van Hollen said the Trump administration has promised to pay El Salvador up to $15 million to detain the prisoners, but noted that Democrats in the U.S. Senate are not “totally powerless” to stop those payments.

“Appropriations need to go through the Congress, and that $15 million, you can be sure we’re going to be looking for where it is because that wasn’t authorized in previous appropriations,” he said.

He said that while Democrats are in the minority in both houses of Congress, they could block any Senate funding bill that included payments for detention in El Salvador.

“You can be sure that I won’t support the use of one penny of taxpayer dollars to keep Abrego Garcia illegally detained in El Salvador,” he said. 

Prisoners look out of their cell as Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem tours the Terrorist Confinement Center, or CECOT, on March 26, 2025 in Tecoluca, El Salvador. (Photo by Alex Brandon-Pool/Getty Images)

U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen said Thursday that soldiers blocked him from entering a notorious mega-prison in El Salvador where the erroneously deported Maryland resident Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia has been held for more than a month.

The Maryland Democrat arrived in the Central American country Wednesday in an effort to help bring Abrego Garcia, whom the Justice Department admitted in court was deported in error, back to the United States, or at least check on his wellness. He met with El Salvador Vice President Félix Ulloa that day, who denied his requests to either visit or speak on the phone with Abrego Garcia.

Van Hollen told reporters Thursday afternoon that he again tried to make contact with Abrego Garcia that morning.

A U.S. immigration judge issued a protective order in 2019 finding that sending Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran citizen, back to his home country would put him in grave danger.

Accompanied by Chris Newman — the lawyer for Abrego Garcia’s wife and his mother — Van Hollen said they tried to enter Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT, but soldiers stopped them at a checkpoint about three kilometers from the prison.

“We were told by the soldiers that they’d been ordered not to allow us to proceed any further than that point,” Van Hollen said.

Van Hollen said that since Abrego Garcia was sent to CECOT, he has not spoken with anyone outside of the prison walls, and “this inability to communicate with his lawyers is a violation of international law.”

The senator pointed out that El Salvador is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

“That covenant says, and I quote, ‘A detained or imprisoned person shall be entitled to communicate and consult with his legal counsel,’” he said.

Van Hollen also said he met with the U.S. Embassy in El Salvador and they discussed “the full range of important bilateral relations between the United States and El Salvador.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt and other Republicans have criticized Van Hollen for making the trip, repeating the accusation that Abrego Garcia is a gang member.

Representatives for the White House and DHS did not respond to messages seeking comment Thursday.

Appeals court slams administration’s inaction

Meanwhile, Abrego Garcia’s case continues to work its way through U.S. courts as a flashpoint conflict between two branches of government that has led to the precipice of a constitutional crisis.

On Thursday, a federal appeals court panel dismantled the administration’s latest appeal, saying the government had done “essentially nothing” to attempt to return Abrego Garcia in compliance with last week’s Supreme Court order.

A three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit said the executive branch was due deference in conducting foreign policy, but that the administration’s inaction in seeking Abrego Garcia’s return amounted to defiance of a judicial order.

The unanimous ruling was written by Fourth Circuit Chief Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III, who was nominated by Republican President Ronald Reagan. The other two judges, Robert Bruce King and Stephanie Thacker, were nominated by Democratic presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

“The government is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process that is the foundation of our constitutional order. Further, it claims in essence that because it has rid itself of custody that there is nothing that can be done,” the panel wrote. “This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear.”

The appeals ruling responded to the government’s appeal of U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis’ order this week for the Trump administration to offer evidence on how it has sought to help with Abrego Garcia’s release from CECOT.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last week that the Trump administration must “facilitate” — but stopped short of requiring — his return to the United States.

In unusually frank language, the Fourth Circuit panel warned Thursday the conflict between the executive and judicial branches threatened the foundation of U.S. government.

“If today the Executive claims the right to deport without due process and in disregard of court orders, what assurance will there be tomorrow that it will not deport American citizens and then disclaim responsibility to bring them home?” the court asked. “And what assurance shall there be that the Executive will not train its broad discretionary powers upon its political enemies? The threat, even if not the actuality, would always be present.”

Near the end of the order, the panel urged the administration to obey the judicial branch.

“We yet cling to the hope that it is not naïve to believe our good brethren in the Executive Branch perceive the rule of law as vital to the American ethos,” the judges wrote. “This case presents their unique chance to vindicate that value and to summon the best that is within us while there is still time.”

Neither country taking action

The Fourth Circuit panel pointed out that the leaders of both the United States and El Salvador claimed they had no power to return Abrego Garcia.

“We are told that neither government has the power to act,” they wrote. “The result will be to leave matters generally and Abrego Garcia specifically in an interminable limbo without recourse to law of any sort.”

During a White House visit this week, El Salvador President Nayib Bukele said he would not bring Abrego Garcia back to the United States.

The Trump administration has admitted in court that Abrego Garcia’s deportation stemmed from an “administrative error.” The administration continues to accuse him of being part of the gang MS-13, despite no charges or convictions of any criminal offenses against him, including gang-related crimes.

Jacob Fischler contributed to this report.

Solar panels in Damariscotta, Maine. (Photo by Evan Houk/ Maine Morning Star)

WASHINGTON — The legal battle over a Biden-era climate program ramped up late Wednesday when an appeals court halted a federal judge’s ruling requiring the disbursement of those funds.

The ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit will keep funds frozen in Citibank accounts while a federal suit over the program is ongoing.

The appeals court order reversed a preliminary injunction that U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan of the District of Columbia issued Tuesday that temporarily barred the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from “unlawfully suspending or terminating” grant awards.

The appeals panel said it had not had access to Chutkan’s opinion explaining her order granting an injunction — which came a day after the order itself — and the trial judge had therefore not met the high bar needed to issue a preliminary injunction. The panel’s order “should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits,” the judges said.

“The purpose of this order is to give the court sufficient opportunity to consider the district court’s forthcoming opinion in support of its order granting a preliminary injunction together with” the government’s appeal, the judges wrote.

Chutkan issued her opinion the day after granting the preliminary injunction, pointing out that “for weeks, despite repeated inquiries to Citibank and EPA, Plaintiffs received little to no communication from EPA or Citibank regarding their inability to access their funds.”

“Overnight, billions of dollars appropriated by Congress were frozen. As a result, nationwide projects were halted, workplans were disrupted, and millions of dollars in approved transactions with committed partners could not be disbursed,” she wrote.

On Thursday, the D.C. Circuit panel asked the government to refile its argument responding to Chutkan’s opinion by 5 p.m. Eastern on Saturday.

Fight over funding

Climate United Fund and other organizations sued President Donald Trump’s administration and Citibank in March over money frozen in the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund.

The $27 billion initiative, which provides funding to organizations building for energy-efficient projects and other measures to tackle climate change, was authorized by Congress as part of the Inflation Reduction Act that Democrats passed along party lines and President Joe Biden signed into law in 2022.

Chutkan’s order blocked the administration from “directly or indirectly impeding” Citibank or causing the bank to “deny, obstruct, delay, or otherwise limit access to funds in accounts established in connection with” the organizations’ grants.

The Trump administration quickly challenged that ruling Wednesday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

The higher court temporarily blocked Chutkan’s decision “pending further order.”

The appeals court’s ruling halts Chutkan’s preliminary injunction to the extent that it “enables or requires Citibank to release, disburse, transfer, otherwise move, or allow access to funds.”

The higher court also prevented the Trump administration from having to file a status report with the district court within 24 hours of the preliminary injunction’s entry that confirmed their compliance, as outlined in Chutkan’s ruling.

The appeals court also ordered that “no party take any action, directly or indirectly, with regard to the disputed contracts, grants, awards or funds.”

The EPA said in March it would be terminating $20 billion in grants under the program, and the agency’s administrator Lee Zeldin described the climate initiative as a “gold bar” scheme.

Climate United Fund did not immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday, and the EPA declined to comment. 

Protesters outside the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland in Greenbelt rally on April 4, 2025, in support of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a Maryland father who was deported to El Salvador in an “administrative error,” calling for him to be returned to the U.S. (Photo by Ariana Figueroa/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen said Wednesday he was denied a meeting with Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, an El Salvador-born Maryland resident who was mistakenly deported to a mega-prison in his home country notorious for human rights abuses.

The Maryland Democrat met with El Salvador Vice President Félix Ulloa in the Central American country in an effort to help bring Abrego Garcia back to the United States. Abrego Garcia is a citizen of El Salvador, but a U.S. immigration judge issued a protective order in 2019 finding that sending him back to his home country would put him in grave danger.

After meeting with Ulloa, Van Hollen briefed reporters on the visit and said the Salvadoran vice president rebuffed his requests for contact with Abrego Garcia.

“I asked the vice president if I could meet with Mr. Abrego Garcia and he said, ‘Well, you need to make earlier provisions to go visit CECOT (Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo),’” Van Hollen told reporters in El Salvador, referring to the mega-prison.

“I said, ‘I’m not interested, at this moment, in taking a tour of CECOT, I just want to meet with Mr. Abrego Garcia,’” Van Hollen said.

“He said he was not able to make that happen. He said he’d need a little more time. I asked him if I came back next week, whether I’d be able to see Mr. Abrego Garcia. He said he couldn’t promise that either,” the senator added. 

Van Hollen said he was also denied a phone or video call with Abrego Garcia to ask how he was doing and report that information to his family. 

The senator said he would contact the U.S. Embassy in El Salvador and request they ask the government of El Salvador to connect the two of them via phone, following a suggestion from Ulloa.

Van Hollen’s visit came a day after a federal judge in Maryland ordered the Trump administration to offer evidence on how it has sought to help with Abrego Garcia’s release from CECOT.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last week that the Trump administration must “facilitate” — but did not require — his return to the United States. El Salvador President Nayib Bukele also said Monday that he would not bring Abrego Garcia back to the United States.

The Trump administration has acknowledged in court that Abrego Garcia was deported due to an “administrative error.”

The administration accused him of being a member of the gang MS-13. He has not been charged or convicted of any criminal offenses, including gang-related crimes.

Van Hollen, noting that the Trump administration “illegally abducted” Abrego Garcia, said he “won’t stop trying” to get the wrongly deported man out of the prison and back to Maryland and predicted others would follow.

“I can assure the president, the vice president, that I may be the first United States senator to visit El Salvador on this issue, but there will be more, and there will be more members of Congress coming,” he said.

Administration responds

Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security posted on social media Wednesday a copy of a restraining order Abrego Garcia’s wife sought against him in 2021 “claiming he punched, scratched, and ripped off her shirt, among other harm.”

In response, Abrego Garcia’s wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura, told Newsweek she had a disagreement with him, but that things did not escalate and she did not continue with the civil court process. 

Late Wednesday afternoon, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt made a statement on the case, displaying the restraining order, repeating the accusation Abrego Garcia is a gang member and objecting to media references to him as a “Maryland father.”

“There is no Maryland father,” she said.

Patty Morin, the mother of a Maryland woman slain by a Salvadoran immigrant in the country without legal status, also appeared at the briefing and spoke in favor of the Trump administration’s aggressive deportation actions.

Children engaged in sensory exercises, often used in special education classrooms. (Photo by Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — As President Donald Trump takes drastic steps to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education, disability advocates are worried about whether the agency can carry out its responsibilities to serve students with disabilities.

Representatives of several disability advocacy groups cited “chaos,” “fear” and “uncertainty” in describing the situation to States Newsroom. They said there’s a lack of clarity about both proposed changes within the realm of special education services and the impact overall of sweeping shifts at the agency, calling into question whether the department can deliver on its congressionally mandated guarantees for students with disabilities.

“It’s only been a few weeks since these things started happening, so I don’t think we’re seeing any of the effects trickle down right now, but we do have parents reaching out to us, calling and feeling really scared,” said Robyn Linscott, director of education and family policy at The Arc of the United States, an advocacy group for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Among the department’s chief responsibilities is guaranteeing a free public education for students with disabilities through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, and enforcing Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, part of which bars programs and activities receiving federal funding from discrimination on the basis of disability.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act was enacted in 1975 under a different title and later renamed in 1990.

IDEA “governs how states and public agencies provide early intervention, special education, and related services” to students with disabilities, per the department.

The department notes that before the 1975 law, “many children were denied access to education and opportunities to learn” and in 1970, “U.S. schools educated only one in five children with disabilities.” 

According to the National Center for Education Statistics, 15% of all public school students in the country received services through IDEA during the 2022-2023 school year.

In fiscal year 2024, $15.4 billion was appropriated for IDEA.

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 states that: “No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States … shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

Closing the department

Trump signed an executive order in March that called on Education Secretary Linda McMahon to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure” of the agency to the maximum extent she’s permitted to by law.

The department also announced earlier that month that it would be slashing more than 1,300 positions through a “reduction in force,” or RIF effort, sparking widespread concerns about how the department could deliver on its core functions.

For special education services, advocates question significant cuts to units like the Office for Civil Rights, which is tasked with investigating discrimination complaints, including those that are disability-based.

Linscott said parents are asking questions such as: “‘What does this mean? Is my child still going to be able to have an (Individualized Education Program)? Is the state going to be required to uphold the IDEA? Or, I have a pending complaint with (the Office for Civil Rights), what does this mean for how long it’s going to take to settle this case or to investigate this claim?’”

Heather Eckner, director of statewide education at the Autism Alliance of Michigan, said it’s been “all-consuming” trying to keep up with what she calls a “chaos factory,” noting that it’s a lot of work for advocacy groups and policy analysts “to try to sort through and figure out what’s real, what’s actually happening, what might happen, and where the impact might be.”

“Ultimately, this is just having a significant destabilizing effect,” said Eckner, whose statewide organization focuses on expanding opportunities for people with autism.

Moving special education services to HHS

That uncertainty also stems from Trump’s announcement in March that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services “will be handling special needs.”

The proposal sparked concern and confusion among disability advocates, both for what that transfer would look like and the legality of the proposed move. 

The president offered little detail into the proposal, but HHS secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said on social media that the agency is “fully prepared” to take on that responsibility.

Meanwhile, HHS is witnessing its own drastic changes and restructuring, including beginning to lay off 10,000 workers — further calling into question how that agency could take on the Education Department’s special education services.

In response to a request for comment, HHS directed States Newsroom to Kennedy’s social media post regarding the proposed transfer but did not provide any further details.

“We have a lot of concerns over both the legality of that, but also just what that means for kind of how we view the education of students with disabilities in general, and how do we view disability in this country, and then what those actual implications on students are,” Linscott said. 

Jennifer Coco, interim executive director at the Center for Learner Equity, told States Newsroom that any move to separate the education of students with disabilities from the education of all students “further pathologizes disability and is treating 15% of all the children in our public school buildings like they’re medical issues — they’re not.”

“They are students who learn differently, a vast majority of whom could learn at the same grade level as their peers if they were provided appropriate instruction,” said Coco, whose national nonprofit focuses on ensuring students with disabilities have access to quality educational opportunities, including public school choice.

Any transfer of responsibility for these federal laws, such as IDEA, would require an act of Congress — a significant undertaking given that at least 60 votes are needed to break through the Senate’s filibuster and Republicans, with their narrow majority, hold just 53 seats.

The Education Department told States Newsroom that no action has been taken to move federally mandated programs out of the agency at this time.

“As President Trump and Secretary McMahon have made clear, sunsetting the Department of Education will be done in partnership with Congress and national and state leaders to ensure all statutorily required programs are managed responsibly and where they best serve students and families,” Madi Biedermann, a spokesperson for the department, said in a statement shared with States Newsroom.