
Some workers would be excluded from student loan forgiveness program for ‘illegal' activity
The Education Department took aim at nonprofits or government bodies that work with immigrants and transgender youth, releasing plans to overhaul the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. Opponents fear the new policy would turn the loan forgiveness benefit into a tool of political retribution.
The proposal would give the education secretary the final say in deciding whether a group or government entity should be excluded from the program, which was created by Congress in 2007 to encourage more college graduates to enter lower-paying public service fields. The proposal says illegal activity includes the trafficking or 'chemical castration' of children, illegal immigration and supporting foreign terrorist organizations. 'Chemical castration' is defined as using hormone therapy or drugs that delay puberty — gender-affirming care common for transgender children or teens.
President Donald Trump ordered the changes in March, saying the loan forgiveness program was steering taxpayer money to 'activist organizations' that pose a threat to national security and do not serve the public.
The public will be given 30 days to weigh in on the proposal before it can be finalized. Any changes would take effect in July 2026.
Under current rules, government employees and many nonprofit workers can get their federal student loans canceled after they've made 10 years of payments. The program is open to government workers, including teachers, firefighters and employees of public hospitals, along with nonprofits that focus on certain areas.
The new proposal would exclude employees of any organization tied to an activity deemed illegal. The Education Department predicts that fewer than 10 organizations would be deemed ineligible per year. It doesn't expect a 'significant reduction' in the percentage of borrowers who would be granted forgiveness under the program, according to the proposal.
Yet the agency acknowledges that not all industries would be affected evenly. Schools, universities, health care providers, social workers and legal services organizations are among those most likely to have their eligibility jeopardized, the department wrote.
It did not give more specifics about what 'illegal' actions those groups were taking that could bar them from the program. But the proposal suggests that performing gender-affirming care in the 27 states that outlaw it would be enough.
If a state or federal court rules against an employer, that could lead to its expulsion from the program, or if the employer is involved in a legal settlement that includes an admission of wrongdoing.
Even without a legal finding, however, the education secretary could determine independently that an organization should be ejected. The secretary could judge whether an organization participated in illegal activity by using a legal standard known as the 'preponderance of the evidence' — meaning it's more likely than not that an accusation is true.
Once an organization is barred from the program, its workers' future loan payments would no longer count toward cancellation. They would have to find work at another eligible employer to keep making progress toward forgiveness. A ban from the Education Department would last 10 years or until the employer completed a 'corrective action plan' approved by the secretary.
Critics blasted the proposal as an illegal attempt to weaponize student loan cancellation. Kristin McGuire, CEO of the nonprofit Young Invincibles, which advocates for loan forgiveness, called it a political stunt designed to confuse borrowers.
Wednesdays
What's next in arts, life and pop culture.
'By using a distorted and overly broad definition of 'illegal activities,' the Trump administration is exploiting the student loan system to attack political opponents,' McGuire said in a statement.
The Education Department sketched out its plans for the overhaul during a federal rulemaking process that began in June. The agency gathered a panel of experts to help hash out the details — a process known as negotiated rulemaking. But the panel failed to reach a consensus, which freed the department to move forward with a proposal of its own design.
The proposal released on Friday included some changes meant to ease concerns raised by the expert panel. Some had worried the department would ban organizations merely for supporting transgender rights, even if they have no direct involvement in gender-affirming care. The new proposal clarifies that the secretary would not expel organizations for exercising their First Amendment rights.
___
The Associated Press' education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Toronto Star
11 minutes ago
- Toronto Star
Mississippi becomes fourth state to send National Guard troops to DC in expanding federal crackdown
WASHINGTON (AP) — Joining forces from three other Republican-led states, the Mississippi National Guard will deploy 200 troops to Washington as part of the Trump administration's ongoing federal policing and immigration overhaul in the nation's capital. Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves said in a statement Monday that he has approved the deployment of approximately 200 Mississippi National Guard Soldiers to Washington, D.C.


Winnipeg Free Press
11 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
What to know about redistricting fights as Texas Democrats return and California starts work
Republicans can move ahead with redrawing Texas' congressional districts now that Democratic lawmakers have returned to the state. Efforts to thwart President Donald Trump's push to tilt the political map for next year's midterm elections in his favor shifted to California. Dozens of Texas Democrats ended a two-week walkout Monday after Democrats in California heeded Gov. Gavin Newsom's call to counter the GOP effort in Texas. In California, the Democratic-supermajority Legislature faces right deadlines, and a plan would have to be approved by voters in November. Republicans have more options for mid-decade redistricting than Democrats because they control more statehouses, and they've talked about redrawing districts in Florida, Indiana and Missouri. Here's what to know. Trump is trying avoid a congressional check on him Both Trump and the Democrats are looking ahead to the 2026 midterms knowing that they often go against the president's party, as they did during Trump's first term in 2018. Republicans currently have a seven-seat majority in the 435-member House. State legislatures draw the lines after each U.S. census in most states — including Texas — and only a few dozen House districts are competitive. In Texas, Republicans hold 25 of 38 seats, and they're trying to increase that to 30. In California, Democrats have 43 of the 52 seats, and they're trying to boost that to 48, to wipe out the advantage the GOP would gain from redrawing lines in Texas. California is more complicated for Democrats In some ways, the nation's most-populous state, California, is a reverse-mirror image of the nation's second most-populous state, Texas. Democrats are even more firmly in control of state government there than Republicans are in Texas, with Democratic supermajorities in both California legislative chambers. But California's districts were drawn by an independent commission created by a statewide vote in 2008 after years of intense partisan battles over redistricting. Democrats are trying to avoid legal challenges to a new map by asking voters to approve it as an exception to the normal process, which would require a special election in November. Texas has no such commission, so its Legislature doesn't have to seek voters' approval for its maps. California lawmakers were returning Monday to the state capital from a summer break. They are scheduled to remain in session through Sept. 12. Why a walkout stalled Republicans in Texas Republicans have solid majorities in both chambers of the Texas Legislature, and a Democrat hasn't won statewide office there since 1994. But Texas is among a handful of states where two-thirds of each chamber must be present to conduct business, and the GOP majorities are not that large. Republican Gov. Greg Abbott already had called a special legislative session when Trump began pushing for a new congressional map, but GOP lawmakers could not conduct business after most Democratic lawmakers left for blue states, including California, Illinois and Massachusetts. But there were pressures on Democrats against holding out longer. They were away from their families and nonlegislative jobs, and their walkout also prevented lawmakers from providing relief to the Texas Hill Country ravaged by deadly flash flooding in July. They also faced fines of $500 per day, as well as efforts to oust some of them from office.


Winnipeg Free Press
11 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Mississippi becomes fourth state to send National Guard troops to DC in expanding federal crackdown
WASHINGTON (AP) — Joining forces from three other Republican-led states, the Mississippi National Guard will deploy 200 troops to Washington as part of the Trump administration's ongoing federal policing and immigration overhaul in the nation's capital. Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves said in a statement Monday that he has approved the deployment of approximately 200 Mississippi National Guard Soldiers to Washington, D.C. 'Crime is out of control there, and it's clear something must be done to combat it,' Reeves said. Mississippi joins three other states that have pledged to deploy hundreds of National Guard members to the nation's capital to bolster the Republican administration's operation to overhaul policing in the Democratic-led city through a federal crackdown on crime and homelessness. West Virginia said it was deploying 300 to 400 troops, South Carolina pledged 200 and Ohio said it will send 150 in the coming days, deployments that built on top of President Donald Trump's initial order that 800 National Guard troops deploy as part of the federal intervention. Trump's executive order that launched the federal operation declared a 'crime emergency' in the District of Columbia and initiated a takeover Washington's police department. The administration has ordered local police to cooperate with federal agents on immigration enforcement, orders that would contradict local laws prohibiting such collaboration. 'D.C. has been under siege from thugs and killers, but now, D.C. is back under Federal Control where it belongs,' Trump wrote on his social media website a day after issuing his order. 'The White House is in charge. The Military and our Great Police will liberate this City, scrape away the filth, and make it safe, clean, habitable and beautiful once more!' National Guard members in the District of Columbia have been assisting law enforcement with tasks including crowd control and patrolling landmarks such as the National Mall and Union Station. Their role has been limited thus far, and it remains unclear why additional troops would be needed. Over the weekend in Washington, protesters pushed back on federal law enforcement and National Guard troops fanning out in the city. Scores of protesters gathered in the city's Dupont Circle on Saturday and marched to the White House.