Speaker of the House Announces Intention for Two More Reconciliation Bills
In several appearances on Fox News, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) discussed his intention to pursue two more reconciliation bills during this fall and in the spring of 2026. “The reconciliation bill today was a big, giant leap forward. But we’re going to do this again. We’re going to have a second reconciliation package in the fall and a third in the spring next year.” He did not discuss possible subjects for these bills.
President Signs into Law H.R. 1, One Big Beautiful Bill Act
On July 4, 2025, President Trump signed H.R. 1, One Big Beautiful Bill Act, (P.L. 119-21) into law. The law makes substantial changes to the Higher Education Act, as amended, and has an “aggressive deadline,” in many cases as being July 1, 2026. The House passed the Senate version of H.R. 1, and a section-by-section summary for each Senate Committee, including the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, is found in a press release from Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee Lindsey Graham (R-SC). The text of the HELP Committee’s section-by-section summary is found here.
Some of the highlights of H.R. 1 are:
- The Workforce Pell Grant program excludes unaccredited programs, but maintains institutional eligibility for all sectors of the higher education community, including for-profit institutions.
- The accountability standards are similar to the accountability standards that were included in the initial Senate bill.
- For undergraduate programs, the median earnings of completers 4 years after program completion are compared with the earnings of working adults with only a high school degree or GED who are not enrolled in higher education.
- For graduate programs, the median earnings of completers 4 years post-enrollment are compared with the earnings of working adults with only a bachelor’s degree who are not enrolled in higher education.
- The change in the new version now only applies to students who have completed their program, rather than all enrolled students.
- The accountability standards apply to all sectors of the higher education community, including graduate-level programs.
- The standards do not apply to undergraduate certificate or nondegree programs (which continue to be evaluated under the gainful employment regulations), but apply to all undergraduate and graduate or professional degree programs as well as graduate certificate programs.
- The standard measures all levels of programs by the earnings of their graduates 4 years after program completion.
- Rather than repeal the Borrower Defense to Repayment (BDR) and Closed School Discharge regulations, the final version delays the implementation of those regulations by 10 years.
- Grad PLUS loans are eliminated and unsubsidized graduate and professional loans are capped.
- Parent PLUS loans are capped.
- Institutions are permitted to set lower loan limits as long as they do so consistently within programs.
- Two loan repayment plans are established: a new standard plan and a new income-driven repayment plan called the Repayment Assistance Plan (RAP).
House Education and Workforce Committee Passes Two Bills Related to Accreditation
On June 25, 2025, the House Committee on Education and Workforce held a markup and passed by voice vote seven bills that Chairman Tim Walberg (R-MI) stated at the beginning of the hearing that addressed “education freedom, accreditation, and workers’ benefits.” The description of the two bills addressing accreditation were included in Chairman Walberg’s opening statement:
“Next are two bills that would enact much-needed accreditation reforms to ensure accreditation uses student-oriented outcomes to properly determine which institutions should be eligible for federal student aid.
“The first is H.R. 2516, the Accreditation for College Excellence (ACE) Act, introduced by Chairman of the Higher Education and Workforce Development Subcommittee Burgess Owens. The ACE Act stops accreditors from using political viewpoints such as diversity, equity, and inclusion as a quality standard for institutions. Accreditors should be focused on producing workforce-ready graduates, not injecting woke ideology into our institutions.
“The second is H.R. 4054, the Accreditation Choice and Innovation Act, introduced by Rep. Randy Fine. This bill requires accreditors to use measurable student-success outcomes, provides an on-ramp for capable new accreditors, and streamlines the accreditation process.
Ranking Member Bobby Scott (D-VA) blasted the Committee Republicans for considering the bills, with six of the seven being “at odds with the priorities of America’s students, workers, and families.” Ranking Member Scott in his press release said that “H.R. 2516 and H.R. 4054 would weaken the accreditation process for institutions of higher education and open the floodgates for colleges to evade oversight.” Further, Ranking Member Scott said:
“H.R. 2516 prohibits accreditors from developing standards regarding specific partisan political, ideological viewpoints, or beliefs. By using vague, undefined terms, the bill’s sponsors claim that H.R. 2516 will prevent accreditors from evaluating schools on their diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility practices. However, due to its vagueness, H.R. 2516 would unnecessarily politicize accountability measures for colleges and universities. This bill could call into question whether an accreditor could even ask if an environmental studies program had classes on climate change, or whether a history department faculty could teach that President Joe Biden won the 2020 election. And H.R. 4054 would make it easier for low-quality programs to evade accountability by ‘shopping around’ for accreditors. The end result of both bills would weaken the accreditation process that could mislead students about the quality of the colleges or their programs.
As Republicans Aim to Eliminate Regulations Impacting For-Profit Institutions, Senator Durbin and Congressman Cohen Introduce Legislation to Reinstate the 85/15 Rule
On June 18, 2025, Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durban (D-IL) and Congressman Steve Cohen (D-TN) re-introduced bicameral legislation titled, Protecting Our Students and Taxpayers (POST) Act, that would reinstate the 85/15 rule, which would prohibit for-profit colleges from receiving more than 85 percent of their revenue from the federal government, including from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) GI Bill and the Department of Defense (DOD) Tuition Assistance.
Senator Durbin said in a press release: “As congressional Republicans scheme about new ways to remove necessary protections for student veterans – including adding a provision to eliminate the 90/10 rule in their big, ugly bill – Congressman Cohen and I are introducing the POST Act to ensure that veterans are protected from the for-profit industry.”
Scott, DeLauro, Murray, and Baldwin Send Letter to Secretary McMahon Urging her to Cease her Illegal Efforts to Transfer CTE Program Responsibilities to DOL
On June 18, 2025, Ranking Member of the House Education and Workplace Committee Bobby Scott (D-VA), House Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chair Petty Murray (D-WA), and Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services Ranking Member Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) sent a letter to Secretary of Education Linda McMahon expressing their opposition to attempts to move the administration of any aspect of career and technical education (CTE) programs under the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 or the adult education programs authorized under the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act in Title II of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act from the Department of Education to the Department of Labor.
The letter said that any attempt to move these programs to the Department of Labor would fundamentally alter the purposes of those programs and “risk turning them into short-term job training programs, much like the programs under WIOA.” The letter also noted that in addition to being illegal, ED’s attempt to move the CTE programs to the Department of Labor, while maintaining policy functions at ED “would create more inefficiency and trouble for everyone who depends on the programs.”
ED Ends Access to Funding for Postsecondary Education for Illegal Aliens/Undocumented Immigrants
On July 10, 2025, ED announced it will end taxpayer subsidization of illegal aliens in career, technical, and adult education programs. In an interpretative rule issued on July 11, 2025 to be published in the Federal Register, ED rescinded a Dear Colleague Letter (DCL) from the Clinton Administration that enabled illegal aliens to access federal public benefits on the basis that the DCL was in conflict with the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA). The interpretive rule also ensures that postsecondary education programs authorized under the Higher Education Act, as amended, such as Pell Grants and student loans, continue to be inaccessible to illegal immigrants.
Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said: “Postsecondary education programs funded by the federal government should benefit American citizens, not illegal aliens.”
FSA Reminds Schools that FVT and GE Data Reporting Runs Through October 1, 2025
On July 9, 2025, Federal Student Aid (FSA) released an Electronic Announcement (GE-25-03) reminding schools that Financial Value Transparency and Gainful Employment (FVT/GE) data reporting for the 2025 cycle began on July 1, 2025, and runs through October 1, 2025. The deadline for the 2024 cycle for reporting and the evaluation of the Completers List was extended to September 30, 2025. References to the earlier Electronic Announcements are included in the Electronic Announcement.
ED Pushes Back a NACIQI Semi-Annual Meeting
On July 8, 2025, the Wall Street Journal reported that the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity’s (NACIQI) is changing its semi-annual meeting from July to October. NACIQI advises the Secretary of Education as to which agencies have authority to accredit colleges and universities. The delay means that the terms of six of its 18 members will have expired and the Secretary will have the opportunity to fill six seats in October. At the October meeting, NACIQI is scheduled to decide whether to renew recognition for the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE), the accreditor for Columbia University. The Trump Administration has been pressuring MSCHE to take action against Columbia University because it has mishandled antisemitism on campus.
ED Revises Guidance on 90/10 Rule – Online Programs and Unapproved Locations
On July 7, 2025, ED published in the Federal Register an “Interpretive Rule” revising its prior interpretations and clarifying its classification of revenue received by a proprietary institutions of higher education under the 90/10 Rule. On October 28, 2022, ED published a final rule amending the 90/10 rule. ED had written in the preamble of the 2022 final rule that it was “restricting the ability of institutions to include non-federal revenue received from educational programs that are ineligible for HEA Title IV funding from programs offered through distance education or at unapproved locations.” The July 7th Notice states that nothing contained in the statute “directs the Secretary to consider the modality of educational delivery, such as distance education,” to be excluded as revenue from sources other than federal funds. Further, there is nothing in the statute that addresses the location of instruction, and therefore, the “location is not relevant for the purposes of calculating revenue within this context under the 90/10 Rule.”
ED concluded that the final rule preamble also was procedurally deficient under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) because the restrictions on distance education program revenue and unapproved location revenue were not included in the regulatory text and, therefore, the preamble language is “non-binding and does not have the force of law.” ED further noted that “interpretative rules,” which state what the administrative agency thinks the statute means, and which do not have the force of law, “do not have effective dates and, as such, institutions may revise their revenue calculations under 34 C.F.R. 668.28 for fiscal years that have already concluded.”
Neg Reg Concludes without Consensus on Proposed PSLF Rules
From June 30 to July 2, 2025, the Department of Education (ED) convened three scheduled negotiated rulemaking (neg reg) sessions of the Student Loans and Affordability Committee held in Washington, D.C. to revise the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program regulations. The objective of the neg reg sessions was to clarify employer eligibility, protect borrowers, and strengthen accountability measures for those who participate in the PSLF repayment plan. Consensus was not reached.
During these sessions, the Department proposed regulating the following PSLF issues:
- Revise the definition of a qualifying employer;
- Define activities that have a substantial illegal purpose;
- Establish when a qualifying employer has engaged in activities that have a substantial illegal purpose;
- Address the impact on a borrower’s eligibility for cancellation under the PSLF program; and
- Establish a process for providing employers the opportunity for notice and the ability to respond.
On July 2, 2025, ED released a press release announcing that the neg reg sessions had been concluded, and that consensus was not reached since one negotiator opposed the proposal. However, the press release said that ED had made 15 substantive changes to the draft regulatory language based on feedback from the negotiators. Acting Under Secretary James Bergeron said: “While the committee was not able to reach consensus, I’m proud that the committee members representing institutions of higher education, veterans, taxpayers, borrowers, and the business community have helped fulfill one of President Trump’s promises to ensure that PSLF does not subsidize organizations that are breaking the law.”
FSA Announces 2026-2027 FAFSA Improvements and Beta Testing Plan
On June 23, 2025, Federal Student Aid (FSA) issued an Electronic Announcement (APP-25-18) providing updates regarding the 2026-2027 FAFSA form launch and announcing the beta testing plan ahead of the public release by October 1, 2025. Beginning in August, all users who create a StudentAid.gov account with a Social Security number (SSN) will have their account verified immediately, instead of the current one-to-three day waiting period. This will allow for the immediate ingestion of tax information from the IRS. Users who do not have a SSN will continue to follow identity validation processes outlined in Electronic Announcement GENERAL-23-123.
In addition, students completing a 2026-2027 FAFSA form will be able to invite a parent or spouse as a contributor by entering their email, instead of asking students for a contributor’s personally identifiable information, which will generate a unique, non-case sensitive code. The code will be sent to the parent or spouse by email and will be asked to “Accept an invite.” The Department expects this update to ease the process for users and reduce errors.
Finally, FSA announced beta testing for the 2026-2027 cycle will begin in August and consist of two rounds, which are described.
Supreme Court States that the Case Regarding a Biden-Era Student Loan Forgiveness Rule will Resume
On June 23, 2025, the Supreme Court announced that it agreed to resume its consideration of Department of Education v. Career Colleges and Schools of Texas, after the Trump Administration briefly put the litigation on hold, according to Forbes. The case involves a dispute over the 2022 Borrower Defense to Repayment rule that streamlines the process for borrowers to have their federal loans discharged if their schools closed or engaged in misconduct.
A federal appeals court struck down the 2022 rule making it more difficult for borrowers to have their loans discharged due to schools engaging in misconduct. The federal appeals court said that borrowers could only present those defenses in court after already defaulting on their loans. The Biden Administration asked the Supreme Court to overturn the federal court ruling and the court agreed in January to take up the case for oral arguments.
However, the Trump Administration then put the case on pause while it considered whether it agreed with the Biden Administration’s argument. Ultimately, the Trump Administration said it agreed with the Biden Administration and asked the Supreme Court to resume the case. The Trump Administration told the Supreme Court that it will aim to create a replacement rule that would be similar in trying to streamline the process for seeking loan forgiveness should the Supreme Court strike the 2022 rule down.