Latest news with #ChristianUniversity
Associated Press
3 days ago
- Business
- Associated Press
FTC LAWSUIT VS. GRAND CANYON DISMISSED AGAINST ALL PARTIES
Decision fully exonerates GCU after years of politically motivated lawfare by Biden Administration officials against largest Christian university in country PHOENIX, Aug. 15, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) voted unanimously today to dismiss its lawsuit against Grand Canyon University's largest service provider — Grand Canyon Education — and Brian Mueller, ending years of coordinated lawfare by government officials under the Biden Administration against the largest Christian university in the country. The lawsuit, which had already been dismissed by the United States District Court of Arizona against Grand Canyon University on jurisdictional grounds, has now been completely dropped after all parties filed a joint Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice with the court. In a unanimous ruling issued by FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson and the other two commissioners, he stated: 'This case, which we inherited from the previous administration, was filed nearly two years ago and has suffered losses in two motions to dismiss. These losses are compounded by recent events: Grand Canyon secured a victory over the Department of Education in a related matter before the Ninth Circuit; the Department of Education rescinded a massive fine levied on related grounds; and the Internal Revenue Service confirmed that Grand Canyon University is properly claiming 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation designation.' GCU President Brian Mueller said he was appreciative that current FTC officials took an objective look at the case and recognized the numerous agencies and courts that have already ruled in GCU's favor on the same allegations. 'As we have stated from the beginning, not only were these accusations false, but the opposite is true,' Mueller said. 'We go above and beyond what is required in our disclosures and are recognized as a leader in this area.' GCU has also maintained that the allegations were a coordinated effort by former officials within the Biden Administration to undermine a thriving Christian university. 'They threw everything they had at us for four years, and yet, despite every unjust accusation leveled against us, we have not only survived but have continued to thrive as a university,' Mueller said. 'That is a testament, first and foremost, to the strength and dedication of our faculty, staff, students and their families. Above all, it speaks to our unwavering belief that the truth would ultimately prevail.' BACKGROUND: A COORDINATED CAMPAIGN Shortly after GCU filed a lawsuit against the Department of Education challenging its nonprofit classification, then-FTC Commissioner Rohit Chopra publicly announced in October 2021 that his agency would work alongside ED and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to intensify scrutiny of for-profit institutions — a category which Democrats historically have opposed and which ED controversially kept GCU in 2019 despite prior approvals from all other regulatory bodies. Those agencies, under the guise of 'consumer protection,' collectively launched five investigations against GCU in what essentially were fishing expeditions requesting voluminous amounts of information in hopes of uncovering wrongdoing. Each claim by one agency subsequently triggered copycat lawsuits and investigations by the other agencies for the same claim, flooding GCU with duplicative allegations and forcing the university to expend thousands of employee hours and millions of dollars to defend itself. The major 'findings' of those inquiries — which were related to GCU's doctoral disclosures and nonprofit status — have now been repeatedly discredited or dismissed by multiple agencies and courts. Doctoral program disclosures: GCU's financial disclosures around continuation courses in its doctoral programs — which are common in higher education — were deemed a 'substantial misrepresentation' by former ED officials despite the fact that GCU provides more transparency than is legally required or that other universities typically provide. The same allegations, which resulted in an unprecedented fine of $37.7 million by ED, were reiterated in the FTC lawsuit. Numerous independent agencies and courts have refuted or dismissed those accusations: Notably, former ED officials, including Federal Student Aid Chief Operating Officer Richard Cordray and Secretary Miguel Cardona, did not cite any student complaints in imposing their unprecedented fine, yet publicly accused GCU of 'lying' to its students and called for the university to be 'shut down.' Nonprofit status: GCU's 2018 return to its historic status as a 501(c)(3) Arizona nonprofit institution, which followed a lawful and transparent process, was repeatedly contested by ED and cited again in the FTC lawsuit despite the fact that it had been approved or acknowledged by: In light of the Ninth Circuit ruling and IRS reaffirmation, ED is currently re-examining its classification of GCU as it pertains to Title IV funding and the university is hopeful that a decision will be rendered soon. Ten Arizona Congressional members have sent a bipartisan letter urging ED to recognize GCU's nonprofit status. VA audits: A VA State Approving Agency (SAA) inquiry in 2023 claimed that two factual and commonly used statements in GCU's advertising – 'Cybersecurity experts are in high demand' and 'Every company needs cybersecurity' – were somehow 'erroneous, deceptive or misleading.' Seventeen of the top 23 undergraduate cybersecurity programs in the U.S. News and World Report rankings have made similar statements about a variety of their cybersecurity programs. To our knowledge, none of those well-respected institutions have received any type of review of their advertising claims by the VA. After GCU disputed the findings and detailed its extensive processes to ensure the validity of its statements in marketing and advertising communications, the SAA was satisfied with GCU's response and took no further action. Second (2024) and third (2025) VA/SAA risk-based audits, both triggered by the FTC lawsuit, resulted in 'no substantiated findings' after they completed thorough on-campus examinations of the university's disclosures and processes. A LARGER PATTERN The disturbing pattern in the allegations brought by former agency officials in the Biden Administration is that they center on practices that are commonplace among institutions in higher education, yet GCU was singled out for disproportionate and unusually aggressive scrutiny. 'This was not about protecting students and went well beyond normal regulatory activity,' Mueller said. 'The language used by these officials, the record fines they sought, and the baseless accusations they made all point to a broader ideological agenda.' This 2024 commentary from the Goldwater Institute summarized the situation: 'The real motivation for department bureaucrats seems clear: even if they can't prove their allegations against GCU, they intend for the process to be the punishment.' LOOKING FORWARD With the FTC lawsuit now dismissed and all federal government allegations resolved in its favor, GCU is focusing on the future. 'We support common sense government oversight but we vehemently reject ideologically driven, weaponized government actions that are not applied equally and equitably to all institutions,' Mueller said. 'As an institution that has a strong record of cooperation and great relationships with 26 different regulatory and accrediting bodies, we are doing an exemplary job of addressing the many challenges that are plaguing higher education while also living out our Christian mission both on our campus and in the surrounding community. That is reflected in the growing demand from students and families who are seeking a higher education option at GCU that is affordable and taught from a Christian worldview perspective. That mission, not politics, is our motivation and we look forward to putting our full attention to those efforts in the future.' About Grand Canyon University: Grand Canyon University was founded in 1949 and is Arizona's premier private Christian university. GCU is accredited by the Higher Learning Commission and offers 353 academic programs, emphases and certificates for both traditional undergraduate students and working professionals. The University's curriculum emphasizes interaction with classmates, both in-person and online, and individual attention from instructors while fusing academic rigor with Christian values to help students find their purpose and become skilled, caring professionals. For more information, visit View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE Grand Canyon University
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
FTC LAWSUIT VS. GRAND CANYON DISMISSED AGAINST ALL PARTIES
Decision fully exonerates GCU after years of politically motivated lawfare by Biden Administration officials against largest Christian university in country PHOENIX, Aug. 15, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) voted unanimously today to dismiss its lawsuit against Grand Canyon University's largest service provider — Grand Canyon Education — and Brian Mueller, ending years of coordinated lawfare by government officials under the Biden Administration against the largest Christian university in the country. The lawsuit, which had already been dismissed by the United States District Court of Arizona against Grand Canyon University on jurisdictional grounds, has now been completely dropped after all parties filed a joint Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice with the court. In a unanimous ruling issued by FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson and the other two commissioners, he stated: "This case, which we inherited from the previous administration, was filed nearly two years ago and has suffered losses in two motions to dismiss. These losses are compounded by recent events: Grand Canyon secured a victory over the Department of Education in a related matter before the Ninth Circuit; the Department of Education rescinded a massive fine levied on related grounds; and the Internal Revenue Service confirmed that Grand Canyon University is properly claiming 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation designation." GCU President Brian Mueller said he was appreciative that current FTC officials took an objective look at the case and recognized the numerous agencies and courts that have already ruled in GCU's favor on the same allegations. "As we have stated from the beginning, not only were these accusations false, but the opposite is true," Mueller said. "We go above and beyond what is required in our disclosures and are recognized as a leader in this area." GCU has also maintained that the allegations were a coordinated effort by former officials within the Biden Administration to undermine a thriving Christian university. "They threw everything they had at us for four years, and yet, despite every unjust accusation leveled against us, we have not only survived but have continued to thrive as a university," Mueller said. "That is a testament, first and foremost, to the strength and dedication of our faculty, staff, students and their families. Above all, it speaks to our unwavering belief that the truth would ultimately prevail." BACKGROUND: A COORDINATED CAMPAIGN Shortly after GCU filed a lawsuit against the Department of Education challenging its nonprofit classification, then-FTC Commissioner Rohit Chopra publicly announced in October 2021 that his agency would work alongside ED and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to intensify scrutiny of for-profit institutions — a category which Democrats historically have opposed and which ED controversially kept GCU in 2019 despite prior approvals from all other regulatory bodies. Those agencies, under the guise of "consumer protection," collectively launched five investigations against GCU in what essentially were fishing expeditions requesting voluminous amounts of information in hopes of uncovering wrongdoing. Each claim by one agency subsequently triggered copycat lawsuits and investigations by the other agencies for the same claim, flooding GCU with duplicative allegations and forcing the university to expend thousands of employee hours and millions of dollars to defend itself. The major "findings" of those inquiries — which were related to GCU's doctoral disclosures and nonprofit status — have now been repeatedly discredited or dismissed by multiple agencies and courts. Doctoral program disclosures: GCU's financial disclosures around continuation courses in its doctoral programs — which are common in higher education — were deemed a "substantial misrepresentation" by former ED officials despite the fact that GCU provides more transparency than is legally required or that other universities typically provide. The same allegations, which resulted in an unprecedented fine of $37.7 million by ED, were reiterated in the FTC lawsuit. Numerous independent agencies and courts have refuted or dismissed those accusations: Similar doctoral claims were rejected by both the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia and 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in a parallel case (Young v. GCU). GCU's accrediting body, the Higher Learning Commission (HLC), described GCU's disclosures as "robust and thorough" in its 2021 comprehensive review. A 2024 review of GCU's disclosures and processes by the Arizona State Approving Agency for the Department of Veterans Affairs found "no substantiated findings." Finally, in March 2025, ED itself rescinded the proposed fine, with prejudice — finding no wrongdoing by GCU and confirming that the university did not violate any Title IV requirements. ED stated: "Unlike the previous administration, we will not persecute and prosecute colleges and universities based on their religious affiliation." Notably, former ED officials, including Federal Student Aid Chief Operating Officer Richard Cordray and Secretary Miguel Cardona, did not cite any student complaints in imposing their unprecedented fine, yet publicly accused GCU of "lying" to its students and called for the university to be "shut down." Nonprofit status: GCU's 2018 return to its historic status as a 501(c)(3) Arizona nonprofit institution, which followed a lawful and transparent process, was repeatedly contested by ED and cited again in the FTC lawsuit despite the fact that it had been approved or acknowledged by: IRS State of Arizona HLC Arizona Board for Private Postsecondary Education NCAA Athletics Independent evaluations from two nationally recognized accounting/finance firms confirmed the nonprofit transaction was at fair market value and would benefit the university. GCU's status was further validated when a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously in November 2024 that ED lacked the authority under the Higher Education Act to apply the legal standard it used in making such a determination and remanded it back to the Department to apply the correct standard. And, in May 2025, the IRS reaffirmed GCU's status after completing a comprehensive four-year audit of the university. In light of the Ninth Circuit ruling and IRS reaffirmation, ED is currently re-examining its classification of GCU as it pertains to Title IV funding and the university is hopeful that a decision will be rendered soon. Ten Arizona Congressional members have sent a bipartisan letter urging ED to recognize GCU's nonprofit status. VA audits: A VA State Approving Agency (SAA) inquiry in 2023 claimed that two factual and commonly used statements in GCU's advertising – "Cybersecurity experts are in high demand" and "Every company needs cybersecurity" – were somehow "erroneous, deceptive or misleading." Seventeen of the top 23 undergraduate cybersecurity programs in the U.S. News and World Report rankings have made similar statements about a variety of their cybersecurity programs. To our knowledge, none of those well-respected institutions have received any type of review of their advertising claims by the VA. After GCU disputed the findings and detailed its extensive processes to ensure the validity of its statements in marketing and advertising communications, the SAA was satisfied with GCU's response and took no further action. Second (2024) and third (2025) VA/SAA risk-based audits, both triggered by the FTC lawsuit, resulted in "no substantiated findings" after they completed thorough on-campus examinations of the university's disclosures and processes. A LARGER PATTERN The disturbing pattern in the allegations brought by former agency officials in the Biden Administration is that they center on practices that are commonplace among institutions in higher education, yet GCU was singled out for disproportionate and unusually aggressive scrutiny. "This was not about protecting students and went well beyond normal regulatory activity," Mueller said. "The language used by these officials, the record fines they sought, and the baseless accusations they made all point to a broader ideological agenda." This 2024 commentary from the Goldwater Institute summarized the situation: "The real motivation for department bureaucrats seems clear: even if they can't prove their allegations against GCU, they intend for the process to be the punishment." LOOKING FORWARD With the FTC lawsuit now dismissed and all federal government allegations resolved in its favor, GCU is focusing on the future. "We support common sense government oversight but we vehemently reject ideologically driven, weaponized government actions that are not applied equally and equitably to all institutions," Mueller said. "As an institution that has a strong record of cooperation and great relationships with 26 different regulatory and accrediting bodies, we are doing an exemplary job of addressing the many challenges that are plaguing higher education while also living out our Christian mission both on our campus and in the surrounding community. That is reflected in the growing demand from students and families who are seeking a higher education option at GCU that is affordable and taught from a Christian worldview perspective. That mission, not politics, is our motivation and we look forward to putting our full attention to those efforts in the future." About Grand Canyon University: Grand Canyon University was founded in 1949 and is Arizona's premier private Christian university. GCU is accredited by the Higher Learning Commission and offers 353 academic programs, emphases and certificates for both traditional undergraduate students and working professionals. The University's curriculum emphasizes interaction with classmates, both in-person and online, and individual attention from instructors while fusing academic rigor with Christian values to help students find their purpose and become skilled, caring professionals. For more information, visit View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE Grand Canyon University
Yahoo
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Tradwives Are in Short Supply
Graduation season is upon us. As a literature professor at a Christian university, I'm often invited at this time of year to family dinners celebrating students' academic achievements—and not long after, I'm sometimes invited to their weddings, too. 'Ring by spring' culture, while no longer as pervasive as it once was, is still alive and well. And though it's most visible at faith-based institutions, the basic dynamic isn't unique to them: put young adults in close proximity for four years, and some of them will walk away with diplomas and rings. Were she alive today, Jane Austen might find the modern American university a fitting setting for one of her novels. Campuses are often equal parts social drama, romantic tension, and economic reality—a perfect cocktail for courtship, or at least intriguing complications. But in recent years, politics have slipped into the storylines, realigning the rules of engagement (pun intended). Because even as some young couples waltz down the aisle, other single romantics are still navigating confusion, resentment, and, to state it as nicely as possible, mismatched expectations about relationships. For young, more traditionally minded women especially, the path to that expected happy ending is feeling less like Austen and more like an unfinished draft—missing the resolution, and quite possibly the romantic lead. This confusion about young conservative women's romantic future hasn't stayed tucked away in library study halls, late-night dorm chats, or even sympathetic women's literature professors' offices for that matter. No, it's also made it into the public square, thanks in large part to viral clips from two conservative commentators: Megyn Kelly and Matt Walsh. Referring to the messaging coming from traditional right-leaning men like Walsh, Kelly said on her show that she often hears from young conservative women that 'What's happening is, they can't find men,' she said. 'They can't find a lot of young men who want to marry a working woman now. … How did we get to the point that we're now telling young, amazing conservative women that they're not attractive if they also work?' Walsh's response was characteristically blunt: 'Men are not generally attracted to ambitious, career-driven women,' he said. 'I've never once heard a man brag about a woman's career ambitions. It's not what men value.' This raises the question: Who, exactly, are these men? Because many men—my husband included—do appreciate their partners' ambitions. In fact, one of the first things that drew my husband to me was my love for literature and my pursuit of a graduate degree, and it was he who reminded me of this fact when I showed him the Matt Walsh clip while working on this article. 'Don't you remember me telling my friends how cool I thought it was that you were working on your master's?' he asked. 'That guy's friends are just that—that guy's friends.' Meaning: Walsh's observations are likely derived from who he hangs around with—and that doesn't always make for universal truths. The problem is the message sent to young conservative men who listen to Walsh, at least on this issue: Not valuing women's goals is part and parcel of masculinity, he seems to be saying. By extension, young, ambitious women who seek a like-minded conservative partner are provided a painfully small box to squeeze themselves into, as Kelly suggests, as well as slim pickings on the marriage market. Meanwhile—and I suggest not coincidentally at all—the tradwife fantasy is thriving online. Perhaps its most famous example is Instagram influencer Hannah Neeleman, a Juilliard-trained ballerina and former beauty queen turned rancher and social media influencer for her brand Ballerina Farm. For her 10 million followers, Neeleman shares lovely, pastoral videos and pictures of herself milking cows, braiding bread, and bathing babies in copper tubs. Her aesthetic is outwardly flawless, her sourdough is likewise always divine, and her children are scrubbed and angelic. (As a counter to this, I admit to owning no cows but enjoying Burger King, having a broken breadmaker, and raising often tangly-haired and even smelly children who get in trouble. That said, I do not admit to having any less love in my life.) Importantly, what's left unsaid in Neeleman's gloriously beautiful videos is the cushion of privilege holding up her platform: Her husband is the son of JetBlue's founder. Her account isn't a return to traditional values once had and now regained. It's elite performance art that most singles straight out of college could never afford. Don't get me wrong: I love watching and following Neeleman's account. Yet the popularity of social media accounts like hers in no way reflects a mass movement of women leaving the workforce to embrace lives of making homemade jam. Instead, I think it reflects a knowledge of what many could never have (and likely don't want either because of its extremity) but an appreciation for the aesthetics of the 'idea' of her life. Followers recognize at some level she represents peak performance of extreme domestic arts. The problem is that when young conservative men point to someone like Neeleman as an ideal marriage partner, they're not looking for a real partner. They're looking for a fantasy, one that's underwritten by money they probably do not have. And, of course, the irony of her wildly successful career as an influencer—building that sort of audience is, after all, a career—should not be lost on anyone. Nor should one overlook the statistical reality that even attempting to emulate this fantasy is becoming increasingly untenable. As of 2023, only about 27 percent of married mothers with children under 18 are not participating in the labor force—and that number keeps shrinking. At the same time, women now make up nearly 60 percent of U.S. college students, a trend with no signs of reversal. If conservative men are adamant about marrying a woman without a job or college degree, they're limiting themselves to a dating pool that's actively shrinking. While recent polling suggests that Gen Z men are trending more conservative, their female peers are moving in the opposite direction. And at the same time, young women are leaving organized religion in record numbers, often citing rigid gender roles and outdated expectations as reasons for their departure. And while I began this article speaking about young conservative women feeling dissatisfied with their choices, statistics show that men aren't doing so hot either. A 2023 Pew Research report notes that nearly 63 percent of men under 30 are single, compared to 34 percent of women. Many men report being lonely, uncertain about modern dating expectations, and unsure how to form lasting romantic relationships. If women feel asked to shrink themselves to be loved, many men seem to have the opposite problem: They're unsure of how to grow into the kind of love they long for. But if today's dynamics feel new, a better model isn't. There's a long tradition in American life of what scholars call 'companionate marriages.' These marriages aren't built on hierarchy, but instead on emotional intimacy and shared purpose. Historians like Nancy Cott have pointed to Abigail and John Adams as one early example: their letters reveal a relationship exemplified by affection in tandem with serious intellectual exchange. In 1776 as the American Revolution gained momentum, Abigail famously wrote to John, 'I desire you would remember the ladies, and be more generous and favorable to them than your ancestors.' She warned that if women were not given a voice, they would 'foment a rebellion.' What she asked for wasn't his submission (even though she might be labeled a dreaded feminist today!). It was respect, a vision of marriage where liberty and love could coexist. A vision, I like to think, of marriage that I believe led to one like my own. And yet, the Matt Walshes of the world seem to have forgotten the ladies. Indeed, it's an odd oversight from someone who often claims to care about preserving the spirit of the American founding. Hypermasculine conservative commentators often verbally hold up tradition while skipping the parts that require genuine mutuality or meaningful sacrifice from men for women who might want to raise children and serve the world in other ways, too. While John was away founding a nation, Abigail was running their farm in every way, from finances to administration, taking on what were traditionally considered men's roles while raising children (including a future president). She is also considered one of the most well-read first ladies to have ever graced the White House. In today's dating landscape, companionate marriage remains possible. Still, it requires honesty and a willingness to see women as whole persons, not achievements in a war to own the libs. Most of the young conservative women I teach want to raise families. Most also have career goals tied to those degrees they're earning. All have ambitions that deserve the honor of someone else. And the same holds true for the young conservative men I'm teaching, who deserve partnerships that call them to something higher than the limited idea espoused on the internet. This isn't a new insight; Jane Austen understood it more than two centuries ago. Her heroines didn't surrender their intelligence or independence to win a man; they insisted on being loved for who they truly were. Elizabeth Bennet refused Mr. Darcy's first proposal not because she didn't want marriage, but because she refused a marriage that didn't have respect at its core. Austen's novels remind us that a good marriage isn't about the domination of any one person over another. It's about dialogue and recognizing when perhaps you might be the one who has a little too much pride—or prejudice. Young people deserve a Jane Austen kind of love story—not a Bachelor one. One grounded not in spectacle, but in sincerity.
