A federal judge paused a U.S. Department of Education rule with implications for federal student loans for nursing students. (Getty Images)
WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Wednesday temporarily blocked the U.S. Department of Education’s new definition of “professional” fields of study, which set stricter borrowing caps for graduate students pursuing certain degrees.
The ruling from U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell specifically halts the department’s new definition of “professional” degrees, which was limited to 11 fields and would impose lower loan caps for groups not included in its definition, including nursing, teaching and social work.
The ruling, which covers two consolidated lawsuits, came just a week before the provision was slated to take effect July 1. It marks a setback for a key part of President Donald Trump’s administration’s forthcoming overhaul of the federal student loan system.
The department finalized regulations, published May 1, that implement sweeping changes outlined in the GOP’s “big, beautiful” law, including new caps on federal student loans, with different limits based on whether a degree was “professional.”
But it overreached by narrowing what degrees qualified as professional, Howell wrote, saying Congress intended to keep the definition in place when the law passed in July 2025.
“The Rule is likely contrary to law,” Howell wrote. “The Rule’s definition of ‘professional degree,’ and thus the category of students benefiting from the high loan caps, is likely narrower (than) what Congress intended.”
But she declined to halt the department from enforcing the forthcoming loan caps because they were written into the law.
Howell wrote that “this litigation cannot remedy plaintiffs’ primary frustration over the elimination of uncapped borrowing to pursue graduate education and the concomitant benefits of enabling more students from working families to earn a graduate degree in a chosen career field and attracting students more broadly to enter the American workforce in fields understaffed and in areas underserved.”
Challenge from health professionals
Wednesday’s ruling stems from a pair of combined challenges by associations representing people in fields that do not fall under the new “professional” definition and would thus face lower annual and lifetime borrowing caps.
One suit was filed in May by the American Association of Nurse Practitioners; the National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners; the American Association of Colleges of Nursing; the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health; the National Education Association; and the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy.
The other lawsuit was filed earlier in June by the PA Education Association and the American Academy of Physician Associates.
In the May suit, the challengers argued that “the final rule’s definition of ‘professional degree’ excludes many degree programs that prepare students for a specific profession, and that may qualify as a professional degree under the 2007 regulatory definition adopted by Congress, including degrees in nursing, education, public health, and marriage and family therapy.”
Unlimited borrowing eliminated
Part of the regulations eliminate a key loan program for graduate and professional students that allowed for unlimited borrowing and establish new annual and aggregate loan limits for those students.
Graduate student loans will be capped at $20,500 annually and have a $100,000 aggregate limit, while professional student loans would have a $50,000 annual limit and $200,000 aggregate cap.
But the programs within the department’s “professional” category and thus subject to the higher loan cap are limited to: pharmacy, dentistry, veterinary medicine, chiropractic, law, medicine, optometry, osteopathic medicine, podiatry, theology and clinical psychology.
In response to a request for comment, the department said in a statement it was “reviewing the order and will take appropriate action,” adding that “we look forward to implementing the RISE student loan provisions and offering new, affordable repayment plans on July 1.”
The U.S. Education Department will temporarily lower interest rates for student loan borrowers who use the auto pay feature. (Photo illustration via Getty Images)
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Education will temporarily reduce interest rates for federal student loan borrowers enrolled in auto pay starting July 1, the agency announced Thursday.
Borrowers who enroll in auto pay — the optional feature that allows a borrower to have their monthly loan payment automatically deducted from their checking or savings account — will see a reduction in their interest rate by one full percentage point from July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2028.
The change means a 6% interest rate would drop to 5%, for instance.
Federal student loan borrowers currently enrolled in auto pay already receive an interest rate reduction of 0.25 percentage points from their servicer. Those borrowers do not need to take any additional action and will automatically receive an extra interest rate reduction of 0.75 percentage points, the department said.
“This temporary incentive is designed to help borrowers pay down their balances more quickly, take full advantage of new repayment benefits, remain on track toward loan discharge opportunities and to strengthen the overall health of the federal student loan portfolio,” Under Secretary of Education Nicholas Kent said during a Thursday call with reporters.
Kent said the benefit is estimated to cost the agency $6 billion.
Changes coming
The announcement came ahead of major changes for the federal student loan system — with many provisions slated to also begin July 1 — stemming from congressional Republicans’ mega tax and spending cut bill that President Donald Trump signed last year.
The overhaul includes new loan limits for graduate and professional students, a restructured repayment system that gives new borrowers only two plans to choose from and the elimination of a key loan program for graduate and professional students that allowed for unlimited borrowing.
Meanwhile, millions of borrowers under the now defunct Saving on a Valuable Education, or SAVE, plan will receive notices from their federal loan servicers starting July 1 that instruct them to enter into a legal repayment plan within 90 days.
Auto pay enrollment halved
The federal student loan portfolio stands at a “staggering $1.7 trillion,” with about 37% of borrowers currently in repayment, according to Kent.
The under secretary noted that at the end of 2019, nearly 83% of borrowers were enrolled in auto pay but that the figure stood at just 40% by the end of 2025.
There are also 9.16 million borrowers in default as of April, per the latest available department data.
Borrowers have until Sept. 30, 2026, to opt in to auto pay to be eligible for the two-year benefit.
The benefit is open to borrowers whose federal student loans originated after July 1, 2012, the department said.
Kent encouraged borrowers to “take advantage of this opportunity and enroll in auto debit as soon as possible.”
Borrowers can enroll by logging in to their loan servicer account and selecting “auto pay” from a navigation bar, he said.
The department clarified that borrowers will need to stay in auto pay to continue receiving the reduced interest rate.
Officials with the U.S. Department of Education announced plans for its further dismantling on Tuesday, June 16, 2026. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Education announced sweeping efforts Tuesday to outsource its special education programs and civil rights enforcement to other agencies, in another major step by President Donald Trump’s administration to dismantle the department.
The Department of Health and Human Services will administer programs under the Education Department’s Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, or OSERS, while civil rights enforcement under Education’s Office for Civil Rights, or OCR, will be transferred to the Department of Justice.
The Education Department clarified in fact sheets that in the agreements announced Tuesday, it “will continue to perform all statutorily required duties and responsibilities.”
“The Trump Administration has been clear: as we scale back federal micromanagement when it hinders success, we are equally committed to bolstering the efficacy of federal oversight where it is essential,” U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement Tuesday.
The administration has sought to do away with the 46-year-old department as part of Trump’s quest to return education “back to the states.” That push continues despite much of the oversight and funding of schools already occurring at the state and local levels.
Congress created the Department of Education, and only Congress has the authority to abolish the agency.
Special education
On a background call with reporters, a senior department official said OSERS “will maintain its independent statutory functions without interruption to vigorously enforce compliance with all of OSERS programs.”
OSERS is responsible for administering the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, which guarantees a free public education for students with disabilities. The umbrella unit OSERS includes the Office of the Assistant Secretary, Office of Special Education Programs and the Rehabilitation Services Administration.
The official added that “students will not lose any rights, including their right to a free appropriate public education,” adding that “no agreement can alter the rights that students with disabilities are afforded under federal law.”
“In coordination with and at the direction of OSERS, HHS will support meaningful stakeholder outreach; grant administration; enforcement, compliance, and monitoring activities; annual performance determinations and assessments; collection, reporting, and analyzing of data for monitoring compliance; and drawdowns of Federal funds,” according to a fact sheet.
Civil rights oversight
Meanwhile, Education’s agreement with the DOJ is intended to “support and bolster the federal government’s enforcement of federal civil rights laws,” a senior department official said.
The Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights, or OCR, is tasked with investigating civil rights complaints from students and families.
Under the agreement, “OCR will utilize the Civil Rights Division to evaluate, investigate and resolve complaints filed under the laws enforced by OCR,” the official said.
The official also stressed that under the interagency agreement, OCR “retains management and leadership of OCR in accordance with federal law.”
Education will also partner with the DOJ on student privacy protection, in which the Justice Department will “review complaints alleging privacy act violations, conduct necessary investigations and recommend potential resolutions,” per a fact sheet.
In another agreement, the DOJ will “provide technical assistance” in training and advisory services regarding the desegregation of public schools, according to a fact sheet.
‘This isn’t efficiency — it’s chaos’
The announcement sparked fierce condemnation from Democratic members of Congress, labor unions and advocacy groups Tuesday.
Rachel Gittleman, president of American Federation of Government Employees Local 252, the union representing Education Department workers, said the interagency agreements regarding special ed programs and civil rights enforcement “will leave our most vulnerable students and families who have been shut out of our education system without the services they need and without protection when they face discrimination,” in a Tuesday statement.
“This isn’t efficiency — it’s chaos,” Gittleman added. “Secretary McMahon is yet again targeting historically underserved students, eroding public trust, and sowing dysfunction for the federal employees who are trying to do their jobs on behalf of the public.”
U.S. Sen. Patty Murray of Washington state, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, said that “instead of helping kids get a great education, this administration is spending its time, energy, and taxpayer resources fixated on where employees sit and illegally trying to shutter the Department of Education,” in a Tuesday statement.
“It’s an outrageous betrayal that undoes decades of hard-won progress for students,” Murray added. “More kids with disabilities will be denied the education they are entitled to by law, and more college students who were harassed or assaulted will go without the justice they are owed.”
Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, one of the largest teachers unions in the country, said the decision “will have dire, real-world consequences.”
“Congress — the only body that can legally take such actions — has refused to follow the whims of the White House when it comes to abolishing the Education Department,” Weingarten said. “And parents, educators, students, and the disability and civil rights communities are rising up — and will fight in every way possible to reverse this in the courts, at the ballot box and in the court of public opinion.”
A sign reminding people to complete the Free Application for Federal Student Aid — better known as FAFSA — appears on a bus near Union Station in Washington, D.C. (Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)
WASHINGTON — A bill to crack down on financial aid fraud passed the U.S. House on Wednesday.
The measure, which passed 249-172, would require the U.S. Department of Education to set up an identity fraud detection system for the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, better known as FAFSA.
Nearly 40 Democrats voted for the GOP-led bill.
The bill safeguards against fraudulent “ghost students,” which lawmakers say have cost taxpayers millions of dollars by applying for federal student aid and college under stolen identities and enrolling in classes, only to later disappear with such funds.
The measure would codify a FAFSA fraud detection tool already underway at the Education Department and comes as President Donald Trump’s administration pursues a sweeping anti-fraud effort across the federal government.
Rep. Burgess Owens, who sponsored the measure, said during floor debate Tuesday that his bill “builds on the good work already done by the Trump administration to protect taxpayer dollars and help safeguard the integrity of the student aid system by ensuring federal aid goes to real students.”
The Utah Republican added that his legislation “takes a straightforward approach, identifies suspicious student aid applications and ensures these applications are for who they say they are before dollars go out the door.”
A similar, bipartisan effort was introduced in the U.S. Senate earlier this year.
Education Secretary Linda McMahon said her department was “proud” to see the House pass the bill, which she said “will cement our ongoing efforts to eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse by requiring screening for suspicious federal student aid applications,” in a Wednesday statement.
“Since Day One, the Trump Administration has been committed to restoring existing fraud detection capabilities while building the most comprehensive fraud-detection system in the Department’s history,” she said.
Fraud detection system
Under the bill, the Education secretary would be required to use the identity fraud detection system to assess each FAFSA submitted on or after Oct. 1.
If a “reasonable suspicion of identity fraud” on the FAFSA is presented, the secretary must notify the applicant and the schools designated on the application that they are subject to “additional identity verification requirements” before they can receive federal financial aid.
The bill also requires both an annual audit of the system and a report to Congress on its effectiveness.
The measure loops in provisions from a separate bill from Pennsylvania GOP Rep. Glenn “GT” Thompson that also aims to combat student aid fraud.
That includes a requirement that the Education secretary prioritize program reviews of institutions that have “demonstrated a pattern” of providing federal financial aid to students whose FAFSA “presented a reasonable suspicion of identity fraud.”
‘Vague enforcement standards’
Rep. Bobby Scott, ranking member of the House Committee on Education and Workforce, voiced his opposition to the measure during floor debate Tuesday, saying the bill “could reasonably be viewed as part of a broader strategy to weaponize student aid.”
The Virginia Democrat noted that while preventing federal student aid fraud and protecting taxpayer dollars “is always a good idea,” the bill’s “creation of vague enforcement standards and punitive mandates without clear guidance” for schools and students could make it more difficult for legitimate students to access aid in order to attend college.
Scott also pointed to the Education Department’s April launch of an identity fraud detection system, saying Congress should allow the tool to operate and wait for the agency to evaluate the results.
“Codifying this new system without assessing its effectiveness just doesn’t make any sense,” he said.
Connor Champion, president of Austin Christian University in Texas, addresses students at the school. Some of the nation’s biggest megachurches are getting into the college business, prioritizing hands-on job training and church culture over a more traditional liberal arts focus. (Courtesy of Austin Christian University)
In the heart of the Bible Belt, a small Methodist college graduated its final class in May 2024, shutting its doors after 168 years.
Birmingham-Southern College in Birmingham, Alabama, was a Christian private liberal arts school that counted among its graduates members of Congress, famous musicians, Pulitzer Prize winners and the former executive editor of The New York Times. Yet it had been unable to endure years of financial losses.
About 15 minutes southeast, toward the Birmingham suburbs, the inaugural freshman class at Highlands College was finishing its first year that same spring. The private Christian school, which has just gotten permission from the state to award bachelor’s degrees, was born out of the nondenominational Church of the Highlands, the biggest religious congregation in the state and one of the largest in the nation. It claims a weekly attendance of 60,000 across more than two dozen campuses in Alabama and Georgia.
Long-established, religiously affiliated small colleges such as Birmingham-Southern are battling the same existential pressures weighing on non-religious liberal arts colleges nationwide: declining enrollment, rising operational costs and a deepening skepticism of higher education among families who fear ideological influence on their children or question whether steep tuition and fees are worth it.
But a different model of Christian education is on the upswing: Some of the nation’s biggest megachurches are getting into the college business, prioritizing job training and church culture over traditional liberal arts. A franchise-style model from a Christian university in Florida has made it easier than ever for them to launch.
The new schools are attracting big donors and growing their enrollment through a built-in base of believers — and some are pushing to access public funding.
States including Florida, Georgia and Minnesota have opened their state financial assistance programs to religious colleges in recent years. The change mirrors a broader push already underway in K-12 education, where states have funneled billions to religious schools.
Many of these new colleges eschew the regional accrediting that’s standard for more established universities. Some pursue alternative accreditation from religious nonprofits that may or may not be recognized by the U.S. Department of Education.
That means students’ college credits may not transfer to other schools or to graduate programs. And the costs of non-accredited coursework aren’t eligible for federal financial assistance offered through the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, or FAFSA.
Supporters of the megachurch-affiliated schools say they’re a good option for students who want practical training for specific jobs, generally in ministry or business. They say students benefit from being closely connected to their local faith community.
But some experts question whether the schools’ lack of traditional accreditation could limit students’ options after graduation, or whether their close ties to one church could have an outsized impact on the school’s accountability and transparency.
“Public funding is something that everybody should be concerned about, no matter your politics, no matter your religion,” said Adam Laats, a professor of education and history at Binghamton University in upstate New York who has written books on the history of Christian education in America.
“And I think it’s everyone’s business if there are schools that are restricting the chances of students in a way that students aren’t aware of what they’re getting into.”
Financial aid
Schools such as Highlands College are growing their physical footprints with big donations from heavy hitters. A $20 million donation from the Green family, whose patriarch David Green founded the Hobby Lobby craft store chain, funded Highlands’ first two residence halls.
In March, 3-year-old Austin Christian University — born out of Texas-based Celebration Church, which has more than 23,000 members — broke ground on a $50 million complex thanks to a donation of the same size from Roger Bringmann, a vice president at California-based tech giant Nvidia.
The schools’ focus more closely aligns with many conservatives’ educational goals. Republicans in statehouses across the country have pushed to increase Christianity’s influence and presence in education, while President Donald Trump’s administration has proposed relaxing accreditation rules.
In Florida last month, Republican state Attorney General James Uthmeier declared the state won’t enforce its constitutional ban on funding religious institutions, opening the door for state-funded scholarships for Christian colleges.
The newer Christian schools also may benefit from battles fought by their older counterparts.
Last year, Georgia agreed to allow religious colleges to participate in state-funded financial aid programs after a 64-year-old Christian college sued the state over its law that barred theological schools from public tuition assistance.
And after two century-old colleges filed suit in Minnesota last year, a federal judge struck down a 2023 state law that barred religious colleges from a state-funded dual enrollment program that lets high school students enroll in college credit courses tuition-free.
“We’ve done lobbying at the state level, working with the state legislators to get access to things like in-state, need-based grants,” said Patrick Fitzgerald, a spokesperson for Southeastern University, in Lakeland, Florida, which has partnered with more than 200 churches across the country to help them launch colleges. “Depending on the need in each state and the availability of state funding, we try to access every scholarship dollar that we can for students.”
Many megachurch schools offer financial aid. But tuition and fees at more established church-affiliated schools can run into the mid-five figures — on par with their private college counterparts, but far above in-state tuition at big public universities.
At Highlands College, tuition, housing and fees total about $42,000 per year. The school, which focuses on training for the ministry, says 100% of its students receive scholarships. In-state tuition, housing and fees at the University of Alabama cost $28,196 per year. At Birmingham-Southern, the year it closed, those same costs totaled about $36,500.
But costs vary. At Elevation College, which plans to welcome its first class this fall and was launched by North Carolina megachurch Elevation Church, the tuition, housing and fees are about $19,936 per year. VOUS College of Ministry in Miami, based at one of the fastest-growing megachurches in Florida, charges $12,136 per year in tuition and fees, though that doesn’t include housing.
Single-church affiliations
Unlike more traditional schools that are affiliated with an entire denomination, these newer schools are often deeply entwined with the leadership at just one megachurch.
At Austin Christian, for example, the college president is Connor Champion, the son of Celebration Church’s founding pastors, Joe and Lori Champion.
Quotation
Public funding is something that everybody should be concerned about, no matter your politics, no matter your religion.
– Adam Laats, professor of education and history at Binghamton University
Last year, Church of the Highlands founding pastor Chris Hodges stepped down from his role there to focus on being chancellor at Highlands College, and tapped the college’s president to become the church’s new head pastor.
Some critics say that when schools are closely tied to one church, rather than to an entire denomination, the church’s leadership and finances have an outsized impact on the school.
“You can end up with this insular, sometimes authoritarian power structure, which I don’t mean to say is unique to religious schools, but it is one of the hazards of this kind of institutional structure,” said Laats.
But having a college tied to a local church also can boost its credibility and accountability within that faith community, said Rick Ostrander, a longtime Christian college administrator who is currently the executive director for the Michigan Christian Study Center at the University of Michigan.
“There’s always the danger with new markets and new models that develop some bad actors or just some unhealthy situations,” Ostrander said, “but I think that’s less likely in this area than some other quote-unquote professional areas.”
Church franchise models
The Highlands model — practical, church-based job training paired with academic courses offered through an accredited partner university — is spreading, in part, thanks to a franchise-style approach from a Florida university that has made launching a church-based college easier than ever.
Southeastern University in central Florida is a private school affiliated with Assemblies of God, one of the world’s largest Pentecostal Christian denominations. Southeastern is accredited by a federally recognized regional accreditation body, and it’s one of the fastest-growing private nonprofit colleges in the country, according to the Chronicle of Higher Education.
One reason for that growth is it has partnered with more than 200 churches, including some of the nation’s largest, to offer accredited Southeastern degrees through local startup colleges. Some of these church colleges, such as Highlands, have hundreds of students; some just a handful. Southeastern provides the academics while the church provides the practicum classes.
About a third of the 13,600 students at Southeastern are at schools affiliated with their network partner churches, said Fitzgerald, who is chief of staff for Kent Ingle, the president of Southeastern.
The university helps the church colleges line up curriculum and instructors, he said, and helps secure the necessary state approvals.
“We make sure that their courses are up to accreditation standards,” Fitzgerald said. “We make sure that the faculty they have are well-qualified, and we’re able to provide a stamp of approval on pretty much what they’re already doing, and so it’s a match made in heaven, if you will.”
By offering educational degrees, a church can create a pipeline of future staffers who are steeped in its culture, a priority for megachurches intent on preserving their brand.
And it gives churches additional workers who run conferences, staff events or manage social media, all for college credit rather than wages. That can be a boon for high-revenue megachurches that rely on an army of volunteers.
Fitzgerald said he’s not aware that Southeastern has ever said no to a church that approached it about becoming a partner site. Revenue from student tuition and fees is split between Southeastern and the church college.
Coming changes
One of Southeastern University’s biggest success stories has been Highlands College in Birmingham. The school began offering unaccredited ministry courses in 2011 before joining the Southeastern network in 2017.
In 2023, Highlands was awarded its own accreditation by the Association for Higher Education, a network of Christian schools that has been recognized by the U.S. Department of Education and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation. It now offers more than half a dozen bachelor’s degree programs.
This fall, the college will launch a new business school and a bachelor’s degree in business leadership. The Dunn School of Business is named in honor of the former CEO of a faith-based investment group that has invested millions in a church-planting network co-founded by Chris Hodges, the chancellor of Highlands College.
In Texas, Austin Christian University is focused entirely on business education, offering a bachelor’s of business administration degree through its partnership with Southeastern. Tuition, fees and housing are $35,000 per year. In addition to academic classes, students attend weekly sessions with Christian business executives and can work with Christian entrepreneurs on business projects in a “startup accelerator” program.
The business focus could help protect the school from coming changes at the federal level.
The Trump administration has been working to overhaul higher education, including proposing a new rule that would require undergraduate programs to show their graduates earn more than the median earnings of similarly aged adults with only a high school diploma, or risk losing access to federal student loans and grants.
Some Christian higher ed organizations, such as the Association for Biblical Higher Education and the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities, worry these provisions would have a disproportionately negative effect on Christian institutions, particularly those that train for traditionally lower-paying ministry or church roles.
Fitzgerald of Southeastern said he isn’t concerned that the federal overhaul will harm the newest crop of church colleges.
“We believe that as students begin to really reevaluate the return on investment of higher education, we think that unique models for education like this one are the ones that are going to thrive and succeed,” Fitzgerald said.
Stateline reporter Robbie Sequiera contributed to this story. Stateline reporter Anna Claire Vollers can be reached at avollers@stateline.org.
This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Wisconsin Examiner, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.
The U.S. Department of Education on Feb. 20, 2026. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)
WASHINGTON — The federal student loan system is set to see a dramatic overhaul beginning this summer, and critics warn it likely will make loans more expensive and difficult to obtain for borrowers — driving them to private lenders or altering their plans for higher education.
Among the major changes are new loan limits for graduate and professional students, a restructured repayment system where new borrowers will have only two plans to choose from and the elimination of a key loan program for graduate and professional students that allowed for unlimited borrowing.
The provisions — most of which will take effect July 1 — stem from congressional Republicans’ mega tax and spending cut bill that President Donald Trump signed into law last year.
The U.S. Department of Education finalized regulations, published May 1, that implement sweeping changes outlined in the GOP’s “big, beautiful” law. The department received more than 80,000 public comments before the rule was finalized.
Under Secretary of Education Nicholas Kent said that “at a high level,” the reforms center on “lowering the cost of college, simplifying student loan repayment and restoring accountability to the federal student lending system,” during an April 30 call with reporters regarding the new regulations.
The average federal student loan debt balance stands at $39,547, according to the Education Data Initiative.
As July 1 approaches, here’s a closer look at some of the biggest changes coming to the federal student loan system:
Elimination of Grad PLUS
The Grad PLUS program, which allowed for graduate and professional students to borrow up to the full cost of attendance, will soon be eliminated under the package and unavailable for new borrowers.
“If you are currently borrowing Grad PLUS loans, so you borrowed Grad PLUS loans before July 1, you will be allowed to continue using Grad PLUS until you finish your program, or until three years have expired, basically whichever is sooner,” said Preston Cooper, senior fellow in higher education policy at the American Enterprise Institute, a right-leaning think tank.
“Current students are grandfathered in — it will only be new graduate students, as of this fall, after July 1, who will be subject to the new loan limits,” Cooper said.
New borrowing caps
The package also sets forth new annual and aggregate loan limits for graduate and professional students, along with parents who take out federal student loans for dependent undergraduate students.
Graduate student loans will be capped at $20,500 annually, with a $100,000 aggregate limit.
Parent PLUS borrowers will have an annual cap of $20,000 and an aggregate cap of $65,000 per dependent.
Professional student loans will have a $50,000 annual limit and an aggregate cap of $200,000.
The programs that fall within the department’s “professional” category and are subject to that larger loan cap include: pharmacy, dentistry, veterinary medicine, chiropractic, law, medicine, optometry, osteopathic medicine, podiatry, theology and clinical psychology.
The department clarified in a fact sheet on the finalized regulations that the “professional” student classifications “do not express a value judgment about the importance of any occupation or field” but instead serve a “loan-administration function.”
In another major shift, the regulations replace prior repayment options with two new plans — the Repayment Assistance Plan, or RAP, and the Tiered Standard plan — both of which will launch July 1.
RAP is an income-based repayment plan that “waives unpaid interest for borrowers who make on-time payments that do not fully cover accruing interest,” per the department’s fact sheet.
Balances under the plan will also “decline with each on-time payment, as unpaid interest is fully waived and the Department then reduces principal by an amount equal to the borrower’s payment, up to $50,” per the agency.
The Tiered Standard plan offers fixed monthly payments, ranging from a 10-year to 25-year period, depending on the outstanding principal balance of the borrower.
‘A lot more expensive’
“The upshot is that loan repayment is going to get a lot more expensive for almost everyone, and for some people, it’s going to get significantly more expensive, and the transition is also going to be difficult for a lot of people to manage,” Michele Zampini, associate vice president for federal policy and advocacy at the Institute for College Access & Success, told States Newsroom.
Zampini, whose organization aims to advance affordability, accountability and equity in higher education, said she thinks “there will be a lot of students who will have to turn to the private loan market, who otherwise would have been able to cover their costs through the (Grad PLUS) program.”
Victoria Jackson, assistant director of higher education policy at the nonprofit policy and advocacy group EdTrust, said that with the new loan limits and “drastic cuts to aid availability” in the regulations, “you would really hope that it would come with other, more affordable and better forms of financial aid.”
“And what they’ve done is just created this vacuum that right now can really only be filled with private loans, which are costlier and riskier for students, or students are just not going to go,” Jackson said.
Under the most recent agreement, the Treasury Department will take over Education’s responsibility for collecting on defaulted federal student loan debt — the first step in a multiphase process toward Treasury taking on Education’s entire, roughly $1.7 trillion federal student loan portfolio.
Transition to new system
Zampini noted that, when it comes to the incoming student loan regulations, she does not have confidence in the Education Department’s “ability at this moment to successfully manage the transition without a lot of issues, as far as servicing and as far as account tracking and plan enrollment and things like that.”
Jackson, of EdTrust, said that “by weakening the federal financial aid system, I think there’s a weakening of our higher education system and making it more difficult for low-income students, students of color and other marginalized students to access graduate education.”
She added that “people who complete those degrees tend to have more financial security in the future — they earn more over their lifetimes and, on markers of financial success and opportunity, do better.”
“I think this is one prong of a plan of undermining our overall higher education system.”
The Lyndon Baines Johnson Department of Education Building pictured on Nov. 25, 2024. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)
WASHINGTON — U.S. senators across the aisle pushed back Tuesday against President Donald Trump’s proposal to eliminate funding for programs serving disadvantaged students.
Education Secretary Linda McMahon defended those and other proposed cuts to her agency outlined in Trump’s fiscal 2027 budget request, which calls for $75.7 billion in new discretionary budget authority for the department that would mark a $3.2 billion, or 4.1%, reduction from fiscal 2026 levels.
The administration has taken major steps to dismantle the 46-year-old Department of Education as part of the president’s quest to send education “back to the states.” That effort continues despite much of the funding and oversight of schools already occurring at the state and local levels.
U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon testifies at a hearing of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies on April 28, 2026. (Screenshot from committee livestream)
“We’ve been clear: Shifting authority back to the states will not come at the expense of the central federal programs (and) support, much of which predate the department itself,” McMahon told lawmakers at the hearing of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies.
The panel shares jurisdiction over Education Department spending with the corresponding subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee. The president’s budget request is generally considered a starting point for negotiations, but Congress is responsible for deciding federal spending.
Bipartisan support for TRIO
Republican and Democratic senators took particular aim at the administration’s proposal to eliminate Federal TRIO Programs in fiscal 2027.
The Federal TRIO Programs — funded at $1.19 billion this fiscal year — help support groups including low-income students, first-generation college students, individuals with disabilities and veterans.
Sen. Susan Collins, chair of the full Senate Appropriations Committee, said she opposes the president’s proposal to eliminate TRIO, noting that these programs have “changed the lives of countless first-generation and low-income students in Maine and across the country.”
The Maine Republican added that TRIO “enjoys robust support and has made such a difference in the lives of children.”
Arkansas GOP Sen. John Boozman also emphasized his support for TRIO, noting that in his state, these programs “have been a game-changer in helping low-income and first-generation students not only access higher education, but also succeed once they are there.”
Sen. Jeff Merkley was the first in his family to go to college and said he comes from a “very blue-collar, frontier, homesteading, timber background.”
The Oregon Democrat said it’s from that perspective he believes that “having conscious programs to help people overcome the cultural chasm that exists between blue-collar kids like myself and that college world that you have very little contact on is enormously valuable in America, and the stats from these programs are pretty damn impressive.”
The secretary told the panel that while “there are many instances where the TRIO program has been very beneficial … as we look across the country in how to spend these dollars and how to have similar results by maybe not necessarily focusing students towards college degrees, maybe there’s another way for them to have their path to success.”
McMahon said her agency was in the process of spending “about $2.1 million” for investigating and evaluating the TRIO programs.
In its summary of Trump’s fiscal 2027 budget request, the department said that TRIO “has failed to meet the vast majority of its performance measures, and studies of program effectiveness have shown that it has not increased college enrollment.”
Dems decry plan to eliminate agency
Meanwhile, McMahon took heat from the leading Democrats on the subcommittee and the broader Senate Appropriations panel over the administration’s ongoing efforts to dismantle the agency.
Part of those efforts include several interagency agreements between Education and the departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Interior, State and Treasury that transfer many of Education’s responsibilities to those agencies.
Sen. Tammy Baldwin, ranking member of the subcommittee, said Education “is transferring the vast majority of its programs to other federal departments, agencies with little experience or expertise or capacity to administer them.”
The Wisconsin Democrat said that instead of “reducing bureaucracy” — a major goal of the administration across the federal government and the department in particular — the transfers are creating “another layer of it.”
She added that “where states previously primarily dealt with the Department of Education, they will now have to deal with multiple federal agencies.”
Sen. Patty Murray of Washington state, the top Democrat on the full Appropriations Committee, pressed McMahon on the status of the administration mulling the transfer of special education services out of the Education Department amid its dismantling efforts.
The possible move to transfer programs out of the department’s Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services has stoked widespread concern from disability advocates.
McMahon said her department was “still evaluating where those programs would best be located, and we have not made that determination yet.”
“I can assure you that the intent of this administration is not to put these students at risk in any way whatsoever,” McMahon said.
But Murray was not satisfied with the secretary’s response, saying she is “deeply concerned that your answer sounds like you’re still moving ahead — let’s make it clear that will break the law, and it will make it a lot harder for these students with disabilities to get the education and understanding that their country will stand behind them with that.”
U.S. Sen. Mazie Hirono, a Hawaii Democrat, holds a press conference outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on April 22, 2026. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)
WASHINGTON — Congressional Democrats, advocates, students and leaders on Wednesday blasted attempts by President Donald Trump’s administration to do away with funding for minority-serving institutions in higher education.
U.S. Sen. Mazie Hirono led a press conference outside the U.S. Capitol that called on the administration to fully fund and protect the more than 800 minority-serving institutions, or MSIs, which enroll millions of students of color. Many are from low-income households or are the first in their families to attend college.
“Donald Trump is doing all he can basically to dismantle support for education in this country, and what is happening to minority-serving institutions is part of this all-out attack,” the Hawaii Democrat said.
“Under the false pretense of addressing discrimination, this regime is limiting access to higher education for underserved and underrepresented groups, and there are millions of students who are being served by these programs,” she added.
Along with advocates, leaders and students, Hirono was joined by fellow Democrats: Sen. Alex Padilla, chair of the Senate Hispanic-Serving Institutions Caucus; Rep. Mark Takano, first vice chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus; Rep. Juan Vargas of California, of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus; and Rep. Danny Davis of Illinois, of the Congressional Black Caucus.
Padilla, of California, said MSIs are “better training the future leaders, entrepreneurs (and) servants” that communities need.
“That’s what we’re standing up for. That’s what we’re fighting for, and that’s (why) we’re calling on Republican colleagues to join us, to push back on the threats of this administration and maintain our decades-long steadfast support of minority-serving institutions for the interest of these young people, their families, their communities and our country.”
Takano, also of California, said “Congress funded these programs, and we will fight for them, and they cannot impound the funds.”
He added that “Congress has the power of the purse, and we will make sure we hold this administration accountable.”
Programs called ‘racially discriminatory’
Trump — who has sought to end diversity, equity and inclusion policies in schools — has proposed eliminating funding for minority-serving institutions, totaling $354 million, as part of his fiscal 2027 budget request.
The U.S. Department of Education in September gutted and reprogrammed $350 million in discretionary funds that support MSIs, over claims that the programs for Black, Asian, Indigenous and Hispanic students and more are “racially discriminatory.”
The Justice Department in December issued an opinion finding several grant programs for minority-serving institutions to be “unconstitutional.”
U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon concurred with the opinion, and the agency said later that month it was “currently evaluating the full impact” of the opinion on affected programs.
The president signed into law in February a spending package that funds the Education Department at $79 billion this fiscal year and also “increases funding for all Title III and V programs that support HBCUs, Hispanic Serving Institutions, Tribal colleges, and other minority-serving institutions,” per Senate Appropriations Committee Democrats’ summary.
The Iowa Department of Education launched its first Iowa School Bus Safety Week Poster Contest, inviting students across the state to showcase their artistic talents while promoting an important safety message.
According to a press release, the inaugural 2025–2026 post contest theme, “Safe Rides, Everyday Heroes,” recognizes the vital role school bus drivers and transportation staff play in safely transporting Iowa students each day.
The poster contest is open to students in four divisions: Kindergarten through second grade, third through fifth grade, sixth through eighth grade, and computer-aided drawing (CAD). All entries must be received by April 17 at 11:59 p.m. CST. Students may submit their posters either by mail or electronically through the official contest entry form.
Poster Contest Rules
To be eligible, each poster must display the theme exactly as written, including punctuation, and include at least part of a yellow school bus. Posters that fail to reflect the theme verbatim will be disqualified.
Entries must measure either 11 inches by 17 inches or 12 inches by 18 inches and may be oriented vertically or horizontally. While there is no limit on colors or artistic media, certain materials, including lamination, collage elements, glued-on pieces, stenciled or preprinted lettering, and copyrighted images such as logos, clip art, or stock graphics, are prohibited. All artwork must be original and promote positive school bus safety behaviors.
Mail-in submissions must be delivered flat to the Department of Education’s Bureau of School Business Operations in Des Moines and include a completed entry label securely fastened to the back of the poster with the required student and school information. Digital submissions must be provided as a PDF or high-resolution png or jpg file at a minimum of 300 dpi for proper printing.
Winning artists will receive recognition fn May, and printed copies of the top posters will be distributed statewide ahead of National School Bus Safety Week Oct. 19–23. First-place winners in each division will also advance to national competition. Posters will be judged by professionals in pupil transportation based on safety impact, originality, artistic quality, and overall visual impact.
Login
