States say the education department’s loan restrictions could prevent aspiring nurses from continuing their careers.
Image credit: Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | SDI Productions/E+/Getty Images
Half of the nation’s states and Washington, DC, sued the Department of Education on Tuesday, asking a judge to overturn the agency’s decision to subject students in all but a few majors to strict new loan limits.
At stake are students’ access to the jobs they desire, the ability of universities to charge them what they deem necessary degrees and the nation’s supply of health workers, among other issues.
The states—all led by a Democratic governor or a Democratic attorney general—have filed a lawsuit in the US District Court for the District of Maryland seeking to overturn parts of the ED’s use of loan restrictions created by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA).
That law, passed by Congress last summer, ended the Grad PLUS program, which allowed undergraduate students to borrow up to their full cost of attendance. The OBBBA replaced that with loan caps that would limit “graduate students” to borrowing $20,500 per year, or $100,000 in total, and “professional students” to borrowing $50,000 per year, or $200,000 in total.
The ED law—which was finalized on April 30 and will go into effect on July 1—defines which degrees fall into which category. The lawsuit argues that it does so illegally, in a manner contrary to the intent of Congress.
The law states that only students in 11 degree programs can borrow at the higher, “professional” level: pharmacy, dentistry, veterinary medicine, chiropractic, law, medicine, optometry, osteopathic medicine, podiatry, theology and clinical psychology. ED considered all other programs to be “degrees.”
The lawsuit notes that, except for clinical psychology, those 11 programs were also listed in the previous definition of professional degrees that Congress included in the OBBBA. But that definition said, “Examples of professional degrees include but are not limited to” before listing the programs.
States Joining the Case
In Arizona
California
In Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Hawaii
Illinois
in Kentucky
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
In Michigan
Minnesota
Nevada
New Jersey
In New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
In Oregon
in Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
Virginia
Vermont
Washington
In Wisconsin
“The Final Rule narrows the definition included in it [OBBBA] and effectively made the indicative list of degrees exclusive, thereby excluding many health care and other professional degrees that would have qualified for the higher threshold,” the lawsuit said.
“The list of examples is taken from legislation that had not been changed since the 1950s, a time when graduate programs in nursing and other health professions did not exist and law students were still getting LLBs. [bachelor of laws degrees],” said the case.” The states say the ED also ignored changes in standards of expectation over time, including that “a Doctor of Physical Therapy degree has been the required degree in that field for ten years.”
“They are deliberately misrepresenting what Congress passed,” North Carolina Attorney General Jeff Jackson said at a Tuesday news conference, where he was joined by the president of the American Academy of Nursing, representatives of the North Carolina Academy of Physician Associates and others. Jackson, whose status is among those suing, said Congress “provided a list of examples. It was not intended to be exhaustive.”
In an emailed statement, ED Under Secretary Nicholas Kent said these “standardized loans” were “created by Congress” and “already encourage colleges and universities to lower tuition.”
“For years, Democrats have argued illegal student loan forgiveness to ‘end the debt crisis’ and buy votes, and now the same people are fighting the Trump Administration’s. legal Efforts to lower the cost of college,” said Kent.” He added that “these Democratic governors and attorneys general are more concerned with the foundation of institutions than with American students and families being able to get an affordable education.”
The defendant states also claim that the ED rule is arbitrary, capricious and violates the Administrative Procedure Act. They wrote that the ED “improperly relied on several factors that Congress did not intend to consider—such as whether experts are subject to supervision and the ‘historical context’ of the Department’s regulation—and its application of those factors is inconsistent and inconsistent.”
Jackson said at a news conference that “we have a severe shortage of health workers in North Carolina. We have a clear shortage of primary care in 93 out of 100 counties, especially in rural counties.” The ED rule could exacerbate that, he said, adding, “This is not just a staffing issue, this is a respect issue.” That these people are getting degrees that are not professional degrees—it’s not true, it’s wrong and it’s illegal.”
Debra J. Barksdale, president of the American Academy of Nursing, said the law would “take away important loan opportunities for graduate nurses, nurses trained to provide high quality care to patients, especially in rural, underserved and high-need areas.”
