GW Federal Update (July 9)

Key Takeaways

• A proposed Office of Management and Budget rule threatens to substantially change research and grantmaking in higher education, including by giving political appointees more authority to review current and proposed federal grants to “ensure that federal award proposals selected for funding are consistent with applicable law, federal agency priorities, and the national interest.” GW formally submitted comments to OMB, warning that several provisions of the proposed rule could introduce severe unintended consequences for the national research ecosystem.
   
• A D.C. federal judge has issued a temporary injunction blocking a core component of the Trump Administration’s student loan cap rule, striking down a strict definition of a “professional degree” that would have capped federal borrowing at $100,000 for many graduate fields. In response to the court order, the Department of Education’s Federal Student Aid office announced an interim expanded list of 29 qualifying professional fields. For GW and other universities, the new list provides immediate relief for students studying in healthcare disciplines. In a separate victory for student borrowers, federal judges blocked proposed restrictions to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program, maintaining the status quo for current nonprofit sector borrowers.

GW Updates

America's 250th

• This year's Fourth of July marked the 250th anniversary of the United States, a milestone celebrating the signing of the Declaration of Independence. The holiday brought increased foot and vehicle traffic to the Foggy Bottom campus and throughout the District as visitors and local residents participated in special events. According to media reports, members of the white nationalist group Patriot Front also marched through parts of the District on July 4. This group’s hateful and racist beliefs and rhetoric are antithetical to the values of our community, and while GW's Campus Safety team did not report interactions pertaining to the group on campus, we recognize the deep concerns and real fears caused by its presence in the District.
  
  As always, we remain committed to supporting the safety of our students, faculty and staff. There is no information that suggests the group intends to come to GW; however, the university stands ready to prohibit it from entering or assembling on private university property, and we would work closely with the Metropolitan Police Department to address any attempts to access GW property.
  
  Prior to the Fourth of July weekend, the university also issued a Campus Advisory with safety resources, and GW’s Campus Safety team has been collaborating with local and regional public safety organizations to monitor activity in the District.

Research and Grantmaking

• In the June 5 edition of the GW Federal Update, we reported that on May 29, the Trump Administration issued a proposed rule that, among other things, would give political appointees more authority to review current and proposed federal grants to “ensure that federal award proposals selected for funding are consistent with applicable law, federal agency priorities, and the national interest.” The proposed rule would ban “grants that push disparate impact liability theories, discriminatory event services, DEI [diversity, equity and inclusion], gender ideology” and “child sex mutilation” while also prohibiting “agencies from excluding faith-based organizations and applicants.” Also on June 5, the AAU, Association of Public & Land-Grant Universities, and COGR issued a statement warning that if the proposed rule is adopted “it will have harmful consequences for research and education institutions, public health, and American research and innovation leadership and competitiveness,” and identifying five key issues for “immediate attention.” ACE subsequently issued a summary of the most significant changes that would impact colleges and universities. The Office of Management and Budget has received over 93,000 comments.

  GW formally submitted comments to OMB today, warning that several provisions of the proposed rule could introduce severe unintended consequences for the national research ecosystem. While affirming a shared commitment to responsible stewardship of taxpayer funds, GW highlights that the university’s research enterprise, which contributes $168 million in annual economic impact in the region, relies on a predictable, stable environment to advance critical work in public health, cybersecurity, and national security.
  
  The university raises deep concerns over a constellation of newly proposed regulations, arguing they could collectively function as an unfunded mandate and stifle innovation. Specifically, GW opposes provisions that would expand the discretionary review of grant awards by political or non-expert officials at the expense of traditional scientific peer review, restrict the use of evidence-based methodologies like disparate-impact analysis, and curtail pathways for vital international research collaborations. Furthermore, the university details the damaging operational fallout of expanding federal authority to terminate or suspend multi-year awards "for convenience" without objective criteria, citing its own recent loss of over 50 direct awards and subawards since January 2025 across projects tackling diabetes, HIV, Alzheimer's, and naval infrastructure resilience. To preserve the historic federal-university research partnership, GW’s submission strongly urges OMB to retain flexible structures for subawards, reject burdensome pre-approval requirements for publication costs, and establish robust due process and closeout protections for multi-year scientific endeavors.

Recent Federal Actions

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion 

• On June 30, the Supreme Court upheld two state laws that prohibited transgender girls and women from playing on sports teams matching their gender identity, concluding that “Title IX allows schools to provide separate women’s and men’s sports teams defined by biological sex.” The majority on the Court found that “the ordinary meaning of the term ‘sex’ at the time of enactment [of Title IX] in the early 1970s was biological sex and not gender identity, particularly in the sports context,” and that “the Title IX regulations allowed separate sports teams precisely because of the inherent physical differences between biological men and biological women.” The Supreme Court ruling pertains to Title IX. While 27 states bar transgender girls and women from participating in some level of athletics, the District of Columbia has no such bar.
   
• In the April 9 edition of the GW Federal Update, we reported that on March 26, President Trump issued an executive order entitled “Addressing DEI Discrimination by Federal Contractors,” requiring contractors to certify that they will not engage in any ”racially discriminatory DEI activities.” On April 20, a number of higher education organizations filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Maryland, alleging among other things that "by equating expression on race and ethnicity with 'DEI,' the [EO] reaches a substantial amount ​of protected expression, including lawful remedial efforts, that touches on race without excluding or classifying individuals based on race." On June 10, state attorneys general in twenty states and the District of Columbia also filed a lawsuit in the District Court in Maryland, alleging that federal agencies implementing the EO violated the Administrative Procedure Act by barring “any racially discriminatory DEI activities” without proper notice or providing “any useful explanation of whether or how the contract term imposed requirements different from existing provisions of law.”

Financial Aid and Loan Forgiveness

• On June 24, the U.S. District Court in D.C. issued a temporary injunction blocking a core component of the Trump Administration’s student loan cap rule under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, striking down a strict definition of a “professional degree” that would have capped federal borrowing at $100,000 for a wide array of graduate fields. In response to the court order, the Department of Education’s Federal Student Aid office announced an interim expanded list of 29 qualifying professional fields, a significant increase from the original 11. This update restores borrowing limits of up to $50,000 annually and $200,000 over a lifetime for advanced healthcare, therapy, and psychology programs, though it still excludes fields like accounting, engineering, and teaching. In a separate victory for student borrowers, federal judges blocked proposed restrictions to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program, maintaining the status quo for current nonprofit sector borrowers while the administration reviews its options for appeal.
  
  For GW, the court-ordered expansion to 29 professional fields provides immediate relief for students studying in healthcare disciplines, particularly within the School of Nursing. Without this intervention, these students would have faced a severe borrowing ceiling that could have forced them to turn to high-interest private alternatives or forgo enrollment altogether. While this ruling stabilizes financial aid options for the upcoming term, university administrators will continue to closely monitor developments as the litigation moves through the legal process.

Department of Education

• On June 16, ED announced a partnership agreement with the Department of Justice under which much of the Office for Civil Rights’ work will move to DOJ. According to press reports, DOJ would evaluate and investigate complaints that come to ED, and then the original Office for Civil Rights would determine whether to enter into voluntary enforcement agreements or refer cases back to DOJ for judicial enforcement. In addition, ED’s responsibilities relating to student privacy as well as training and advisory services will move to DOJ, and the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services will move to the Department of Health and Human Services.

Congress

• The Senate Commerce Committee has voted 19-9 to advance the bipartisan Protect College Sports Act of 2026 to a full Senate floor vote, which has not been scheduled yet. The bill has to pass the Senate and House. If passed and signed into law, this sweeping legislation would fundamentally reshape the collegiate sports landscape and directly impact GW. Co-authored by Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Ranking Member Maria Cantwell (D-WA), and endorsed by President Trump, the bill establishes a federal Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) standard that preempts 39 varying state laws. It also codifies the revenue-sharing caps from the landmark House v. NCAA settlement and grants the NCAA a limited antitrust exemption to govern eligibility, transfers, and NIL rules. 
  
  For GW, a member of the Atlantic 10 Conference, this federal framework would significantly streamline athletic compliance by replacing a complex patchwork of state regulations with a single national standard for student-athlete recruitment. Furthermore, while the bill introduces a five-year eligibility window, caps agent fees at 5 percent, and prohibits "super mergers" by the Big Ten or SEC, it also amends the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961. This amendment allows universities to pool and jointly negotiate media rights across conference lines, offering GW and the Atlantic 10 vital strategic opportunities to collaborate with other mid-major programs to maximize broadcast exposure and athletic revenue.

International Community

• In the January 15 edition of the GW Federal Update, we reported that on December 15, 2025, President Trump issued a Proclamation entitled “Restricting and Limiting the Entry of Foreign Nationals to Protect the Security of the United States,” effective January 1, 2026, that continued and expanded restrictions on entry of certain foreign nationals in 39 countries in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East identified by the Administration as “high risk.” On June 5, the U.S. District Court in Rhode Island concluded that the Administration’s actions are “contrary to law and arbitrary and capricious,” observing that “in enacting its latest immigration policies, USCIS claims statutory and regulatory authority that it does not possess; makes decisions without the reasoned explanations that it must provide; acts without regard for the reliance interests of applicants that it must consider; and justifies its actions with pretextual concerns of ‘national security’ that mask anti-immigrant sentiments that it is forbidden from letting influence its decision-making.” On June 12, USCIS filed an appeal with the First Circuit Court of Appeals but stated that it would abide by the terms of the district court decision pending judicial review.
   
• In the October 10, 2025 edition of the GW Federal Update, we reported that on October 3, a number of labor unions and organizations filed a lawsuit alleging among other things that President Trump’s Presidential Proclamation, effective September 21, announcing restrictions on the entry of new H-1B workers into the U.S., unless their petitions are accompanied by a $100,000 supplemental payment exceeded the President’s statutory authority and violated the Administrative Procedure Act. Twenty state attorneys general filed a similar lawsuit. On June 8, the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts vacated the restrictions in the case brought by the states, concluding that the proclamation was a tax and not an immigration restriction, thus exceeding the president’s statutory authority, and that the federal agency guidance implementing the fee violated the Administrative Procedure Act. On June 11, the Administration filed an appeal with the First Circuit Court of Appeals, and at the request of the Administration, the District Court stayed its order pending the appeal. A contrary ruling on December 23, 2025, by the U.S. District Court in D.C. is currently on appeal in the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, and the case brought by labor unions and organizations remains pending.  It is likely the issue will ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court.  

Other Higher Education Institutions

• Arizona State University: On June 3, DOJ announced that it was initiating an investigation into Arizona State University’s DEI practices based on secret video recordings that, according to DOJ, indicate that “ASU denied equal treatment to students based on race, color, or national origin – while attempting to hide its discriminatory practices from federal scrutiny.”  In one video, an ASU graduate program coordinator allegedly said that ASU had to remove words like “diversity” from some university centers and programs but “it isn’t changing the work.” ASU responded by saying that it is in compliance with federal law and does not discriminate in admissions.
   
• UC Davis: In the June 5 edition of the GW Federal Update, we reported that the DOJ found that the admissions practices at Yale School of Medicine and UCLA medical school unlawfully considered race in the selection of applicants, and the DOJ was investigating the admissions process at many other medical schools. On June 10, DOJ announced that it had found that the University of California Davis medical school also improperly considered race in admissions, stating that the school “openly boasted about ‘skirting’ the Supreme Court’s [2023 SFFA decision on the use of race in admissions] by using certain class-based ‘socioeconomic variables’ or ‘disadvantages’ as proxies for race (e.g., family income, parental education or being from an ‘underserved area’).” In a statement issued on June 10, UC Davis contended that DOJ’s “findings do not accurately reflect the school's rigorous, individualized, and merit-based admissions process and our firm commitment to complying with applicable federal and state antidiscrimination laws.”
   
• City University of New York: On June 9, DOJ announced that it is investigating the City University of New York’s “Black Male Initiative,” specifically whether the program factors select non-white minorities over applicants of other races. According to CUNY, the program was established to “support the enrollment and retention of students from underrepresented groups” with a “focus on the African, African American/Black, Caribbean and Latino/Hispanic males experience,” but that the program is “open to all academically eligible students, faculty and staff without regard to race, gender, national origin or other characteristic.”

Resources

GW is committed to supporting our students, faculty and staff through federal changes. Curated resources are available for staying informed and safe, in addition to FAQs addressing the most common topics on students' minds, including interactions with external law enforcement and supporting international community members.

About this Newsletter

GW publishes this Federal Update to inform students, faculty and staff about how developments in the federal government affect higher education generally and the university. This newsletter includes timely information, answers to questions from GW community members, and resources for support.