Lawsuit Challenges the Department of Education Over New Public Service Loan Forgiveness Rule

Washington, D.C., Nov. 4 — Four non-profit public-interest organizations filed a lawsuit today to challenge a new rule issued by the U.S. Department of Education (ED) that threatens to disqualify certain employers from eligibility for the federal Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program. The plaintiffs in the case — Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights, the American Immigration Council, The Door – A Center of Alternatives, Inc., and the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) — are represented by Student Defense and Public Citizen Litigation Group.

ED established the new rule in response to an Executive Order issued by President Donald Trump. Finalized on October 31, the rule allows ED to disqualify employers from the PSLF program that are deemed to have a “substantial illegal purpose” by the Secretary of Education. Under the rule, ED will decide for itself whether this standard is met, based on its unilateral determination that an organization has engaged in activities disfavored by the administration concerning immigration, gender affirming care, and purported discrimination, along with other areas. The rule’s vague and overbroad language permits arbitrary enforcement against mission-driven organizations doing work or expressing opinions opposed by the government. 

ED’s new regulation threatens to harm many of the 2.5 million federal student loan borrowers who have collectively worked more than 100 million months in public service jobs in order to qualify for PSLF forgiveness. 

“The Rule will make it more difficult for employers in certain fields, such as advocacy on behalf of immigrants, to recruit and train employees, and will chill politically disfavored but legal activities by PSLF employers.” the complaint states. “The Rule is contrary to the PSLF statute, exceeds the Department’s regulatory authority, and violates the constitutional rights of nonprofits whose employees are statutorily eligible for PSLF.”

PSLF was created in 2007 to encourage students to pursue public service careers after graduation. The program offers federal student loan forgiveness to those who spend ten years repaying such loans while working full time in a public service job. The statute creating the program provides a clear list of qualifying employers, which include military service, emergency management, public health, government, public safety, law enforcement, early childhood education and library science, and all 501(c)(3) organizations, among others. 

The lawsuit asks the court to declare the new rule unlawful and to declare that ED lacks the legal authority to change the statutory criteria for PSLF. 

“Congress created PSLF to support those who work in public service jobs, not to let the President play favorites. The Trump administration should not be allowed to use a program designed to reward public service as a weapon against its political enemies,” said Cormac Early, attorney at Public Citizen Litigation Group and lead counsel on the case.

“Congress made a promise that if Americans give back to the country, the country will give back to them. Now the Trump Administration wants the power to renege on that promise if they disagree with your employer’s mission or perceived political views,” said Student Defense President Aaron Ament. “This new, unlawful rule is a slap in the face to the millions of first responders, health workers, teachers, and other public servants who believed the government could be trusted to keep its word.”

“The Trump Administration’s attack on the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program strikes at the heart of civic space and public service. By targeting individuals who choose to work in nonprofits defending the human rights of immigrants and advancing diversity, inclusion, and transgender rights, this rule seeks to silence voices for equity and justice while weakening these organizations’ ability to recruit the next generation of leaders,” said Kerry Kennedy, President, RFK Human Rights.

“Public Service Loan Forgiveness was a clear commitment from the government to individuals who have dedicated themselves to public service,” said Jorge Loweree, Managing Director of Programs and Strategy at the American Immigration Council. “This regulation weaponizes that commitment. No one should be forced to choose between supporting their neighbors and securing the financial stability they were promised.”

“Latino families across the country rely on mission-driven nonprofits for immigration assistance, health care, and programs that support underserved young adults. This rule hands any administration a blank check to punish nonprofits it dislikes and jeopardizes the future of the teachers, nurses, veterans, and legal advocates who serve the public every day,” said Juan Proaño, CEO of the LULAC Institute. “LULAC Institute joined this case to defend the statute, protect our workforce, and ensure Latino borrowers are never forced to choose between serving their community and keeping a promise the government already made.” 

Read the complaint here.

###

About Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights:
RFK Human Rights is a nonpartisan, not-for-profit organization, founded in 1968, that works to realize Robert F. Kennedy’s dream of a more just and peaceful world. In partnership with local activists, RFKHR advocates for key human rights issues—championing change makers and pursuing strategic litigation in the U.S. and around the globe. And to ensure change that lasts, RFKHR fosters a social-good approach to business and investment and educates the next generation of leaders about human rights and social justice.

About the American Immigration Council:

The American Immigration Council works to strengthen America by shaping how America thinks about and acts towards immigrants and immigration. The Council employs four coordinated approaches to advance change—litigation, research, legislative and administrative advocacy, and communications. Follow the latest Council news and information on LinkedIn, BlueSky, Instagram and YouTube. 

About The Door – A Center of Alternatives 

For over 50 years, The Door has been a trusted place for young people between 12 and 24. All are welcome as they are, to be themselves, address challenges, and access services when and how they need them. With our roots in the heart of New York City and a presence across the boroughs, The Door offers comprehensive programs and services, including mental health counseling, health and nutrition assistance, legal services, housing support, arts, education, and career guidance. At The Door, everything is free and everyone is welcome. 

The Door’s on-site charter high school, Broome Street Academy, serves 300 students per year from across all five boroughs, with reserved seats for students who are transitionally housed or in foster care.

About The LULAC Institute

The LULAC Institute is the nonprofit arm of The League of United Latin American Citizens Institute (LULAC), the nation’s oldest and largest Latino civil rights organization. Founded in 1929, LULAC is committed to advancing the rights and opportunities of Latino Americans through advocacy, community building, and education. With a growing network of councils nationwide, LULAC remains steadfast in its mission to protect and empower millions of Latinos, contributing daily to America’s prosperity. For more information about LULAC and its initiatives, please visit www.LULAC.org.

About Public Citizen Litigation Group

Public Citizen Litigation Group is the litigating arm of the nonprofit consumer advocacy organization Public Citizen. For more than 50 years, the Litigation Group has worked to advance the interests of consumers, workers, and the public, and to hold the government and corporations accountable to the people. Read more at www.citizen.org/litigation. 

About Student Defense

The National Student Legal Defense Network (“Student Defense”) is a non-profit organization that works, through litigation and advocacy, to advance students’​ rights to educational opportunity and to ensure that higher education provides a launching point for economic mobility.

Media Contacts: 

RFK Human Rights

Amy Zelvin Reid

reid@rfkhumanrights.org 

American Immigration Council 

Elyssa Pachico

epachico@immcouncil.org 

The Door – A Center of Alternatives

Kirkley Strand

kstrand@door.org 

LULAC

David Cruz

davidcruz@lulac.org 

Public Citizen Litigation Group

Omar Baddar

obaddar@citizen.org 

Student Defense

Kerry Leary

press@defendstudents.org 

The post Lawsuit Challenges the Department of Education Over New Public Service Loan Forgiveness Rule  appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/PNY8guC
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

New Platform Details the Chaos Behind Family Separation

Transparency Project Offers New Insight into the First Trump Administration’s Implementation of Family Separations

Oct. 30, 2025, WASHINGTON, D.C. —Today, the American Immigration Council launched a platform analyzing new records about the U.S. government’s chaotic implementation of family separations during the zero-tolerance period and its aftermath.

The transparency project details how the first Trump administration carried out one of the most shameful immigration policies in modern history. The project also sheds light on how certain stakeholders responded to the crisis, providing important lessons on how the public resisted one of the most egregious and harmful policies of the first Trump administration.  

Explore the data here.

Drawing on thousands of internal government emails, memos, and never-before-seen datasets obtained through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and litigation, the project shows how the first Trump administration’s “zero tolerance” policy was a calculated system designed to deter migrants from coming to the United States by punishing families and obscuring accountability.

“Thanks to these records, we can more clearly see the inner workings of how this atrocity was carried out and the public’s struggle to obtain transparency and accountability,” said Raul Pinto, deputy legal director for transparency at the American Immigration Council. “The same disregard for oversight and human consequences that made family separation possible is now re-emerging in the ongoing mass detention and deportation efforts.”

The family separation project features interactive visualizations and declassified documents that reveal how families were literally erased from government databases, how officials misled the public, and how congressional oversight and media exposure helped end the policy. The project includes audio recordings of actor Corey Stoll reading key internal government emails that reveal the confusion and callousness behind the policy’s implementation. (Listen here). 

Key findings from the archive include:

• Officials knew their data on separated families was “corrupt.” Internal emails show ICE leaders admitting they had “not very much” confidence in their own data on children taken from their parents, even as they publicly denied wrongdoing.
• Oversight from Congress, the press, and regulatory agencies played a key role in ending family separation. However, since then, as of 2025 key oversight bodies like the DHS Inspector General and the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties have been sidelined or defunded.
• Family separation was built around intentional chaos. The records show how confusion was weaponized: ensuring significant delays in reunifying children with their parents.

“The records don’t just show government officials’ egregiousness and cruelty. They serve as a warning for our current moment of mass detention and deportation that is still seeing families separated,” said Pinto. “These records show how data manipulation and secrecy enabled systemic human rights violations during the first Trump administration. Without transparency and oversight, history will repeat itself.”

Explore the data here.

The portal, created after years of FOIA litigation by the American Immigration Council and its partners, allows journalists, researchers, and policymakers to explore key documents and data that expose the inner workings of family separation and the failures that followed.

Despite public claims that the policy ended in June 2018, hundreds of children remained separated from their parents for years, and some have still not been reunited. “Family separation was a national shame made possible by bureaucratic indifference to human suffering,” said Pinto. “The lesson here is clear: a collapse of oversight allows for cruelty to fill the vacuum.”

The post New Platform Details the Chaos Behind Family Separation  appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/QEd4fax
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

Federal Appeals Court Upholds Block on Iowa’s Unconstitutional Anti-Immigrant Law

Ruling Protects Families and Upholds Constitutional Limits on State Power 

Oct 23, 2025, WASHINGTON DC — In a sweeping victory for immigrant communities and the rule of law, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit today upheld an injunction blocking Iowa’s SF 2340. This law, Iowa’s worst-ever on immigration, would have made it a crime for certain immigrants to live in Iowa, even if they are now authorized to be in the United States. 

The law would also have allowed local officials to handle arrests and deportations. This is something that they do not have power to do under the Constitution, as immigration law is handled by federal authorities in order to ensure one consistent national policy, not a patchwork of 50 different state rules that could separate families and create chaos.

“This is a tremendous relief for thousands of Iowa families,” said Erica Johnson, founding executive director of Iowa Migrant Movement for Justice (Iowa MMJ), the organization that brought the lawsuit. “The court’s decision confirms that key members of our community should never have been criminalized simply for being here and living their lives in peace. This ruling restores a sense of safety and dignity to people who call Iowa home.”

The lawsuit, Iowa Migrant Movement for Justice v. Bird, was brought by Iowa MMJ and two individual plaintiffs, represented by the ACLU of Iowa, the ACLU Immigrant Rights’ Project, and the American Immigration Council. 

SF 2340 would have made it a crime for non-citizens who had ever been deported or denied entry to the United States to live in Iowa, even if they later received lawful status or federal permission to return. The law would also empower state and local law enforcement to arrest people for their mere presence in the state, and would require state judges to issue deportation orders. Under the Constitution, these powers belong only to the federal government, to ensure that families aren’t torn apart by conflicting rules across state lines.

“SF2340 is the worst anti-immigrant law in Iowa’s history. Today’s ruling keeps SF2340 blocked and protects immigrants in Iowa from many serious harms: arrest, detention, deportation, family separation, and incarceration, all by the state. At a time when the federal government is causing so much harm to families, it’s all the more important that the state is not permitted to make things even worse. The Court reaffirmed that the Iowa legislature does not have authority to pass its own immigration laws to detain and deport people,” said Rita Bettis Austen, legal director of the ACLU of Iowa. “Immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility, and this decision protects families and ensures that our laws are applied fairly and consistently.”

The law was originally enacted on April 10, 2024 and blocked from going into effect on June 17, 2024; the state of Iowa then appealed the decision. (Review more documents in the ongoing legal case here). Due to this most recent Eighth Circuit ruling, the law will remain blocked for now as the case continues in federal court.

“The Eighth Circuit’s decision resonates far beyond Iowa,” said Emma Winger, deputy legal director at the American Immigration Council. “Across the country, we’re seeing states attempt to take immigration enforcement into their own hands. This could create a reality in which a person could be welcomed in one state and arrested in the next, just for crossing a border. Under our Constitution, immigration has to be handled at a federal level so families aren’t trapped in chaos. This ruling upholds that principle.” 

“Today the Eighth Circuit reiterated what the Supreme Court has said for over a hundred years: States have no business regulating immigration on their own,” said Spencer Amdur, senior staff attorney at the ACLU’s national immigrants’ rights project. “This law would have torn families apart and denied people their right to live in this country and seek legal protections. The court was right to strike it down, just like courts have done for other laws like this around the country.”

See past documents in the lawsuit here. 

The post Federal Appeals Court Upholds Block on Iowa’s Unconstitutional Anti-Immigrant Law appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/IOMo5kp
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

National Immigrant Rights Organizations Sue the Federal Government Over Withheld Records on ICE Arrests in Immigration Courts

Washington, D.C, October 15 — Today, LatinoJustice PRLDEF, the American Immigration Council, and Democracy Forward filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, demanding the release of critical records the government has unlawfully withheld about arrests at immigration courts and the dismissal of immigration cases.  

Read the lawsuit filing here.

Since May 20, 2025, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the U.S Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S Department of Justice (DOJ) and Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), have been taking part in a coordinated effort to detain noncitizens appearing for hearings in immigration courts nationwide.  

Arresting people who voluntarily show up for their immigration court dates in search of protection is a deeply problematic practice. Immigration courts are not criminal courts and are supposed to be places that guarantee fair hearings, not act as pipelines into detention. When those who show up seeking a fair day in court are instead arrested, it undermines core tenets of our democracy, discourages people from pursuing their legal rights, and inflicts serious human costs.   

Additionally, ICE attorneys have been asking immigration judges to dismiss cases and shift people into expedited removal, a fast-track process with fewer due process protections and no path to permanent residence. The EOIR, the agency which runs the immigration courts, has directed immigration judges to grant these dismissals on the spot, even though this violates agency policy and long-standing practice. 

Seeking to better understand how and why arrests at immigration courts are taking place, LatinoJustice and the American Immigration Council filed a total of 11 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, six with the EOIR and five with ICE on July 28 and 29, 2025. The requests seek basic information about arrests and dismissals around immigration courts, and communications between and within the agencies coordinating these activities. LatinoJustice and the Council also asked for these requests to be handled quickly through expedited processing.     

Yet to date, the government has failed to provide timely and adequate responses to ten of these FOIA requests, in violation of the law. The EOIR has declared that it cannot find any guidance it issued to immigration judges about dismissing cases and courthouse arrests, even though a copy of applicable guidance has been leaked to the public. The EOIR has also refused to even search for records about the extent of its coordination with ICE, while ICE has ignored or delayed the processing of all the requests to it.  

“Our FOIA requests seek to shine a light on how ICE operates in immigration courts, where families are fighting to keep their families together and for their future,” said Rex Chen, supervising counsel for Immigrant Rights at LatinoJustice PRLDEF. “Instead of transparency, they have chosen secrecy, stonewalling or have provided inadequate responses to our request. It is unacceptable to prolong this urgent matter.” 

“Families’ futures are on the line. That’s why we need to better understand how these arrests at immigration courts are being carried out, and the degree to which supposedly independent and neutral agencies like the EOIR are pushing a mass deportation agenda. The public has a right to know what the EOIR and ICE are doing behind closed doors,” said Chris Opila, staff attorney for transparency at the American Immigration Council.

Read the lawsuit filing here.

“The public has a right to know when our government rewrites the rules to make mass arrests and deny people of due process — especially inside the very courtrooms meant to deliver justice,” said Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, which is separately litigating to challenge these arrests. “The administration cannot hide guidance that turns immigration courts into traps and accelerates deportations without fair hearings. We will not allow these agencies to operate in the shadows. Transparency is the first safeguard against abuse of power, and we’re in court to demand accountability.” 

The lawsuit seeks to compel the four agencies to comply fully with FOIA and turn over all the documents responsive to 7 of the requests. It also demands the expedited disclosure of guidance directives and correspondence between ICE and the EOIR.  

About LatinoJustice  
LatinoJustice PRLDEF works to create a more just society by using and challenging the rule of law to secure transformative, equitable and accessible justice, by empowering our community and by fostering leadership through advocacy and education. For over 50 years, LatinoJustice PRLDEF has acted as an advocate against injustices throughout the country. To learn more about LatinoJustice, visit www.LatinoJustice.org  

About Democracy Forward Foundation 

Democracy Forward Foundation is a national legal organization that advances democracy and social progress through litigation, policy, public education, and regulatory engagement. For more information, please visit www.democracyforward.org  

About the American Immigration Council 

The American Immigration Council works to strengthen America by shaping how America thinks about and acts towards immigrants and immigration and by working toward a more fair and just immigration system that opens its doors to those in need of protection and unleashes the energy and skills that immigrants bring. The Council brings together problem solvers and employs four coordinated approaches to advance change—litigation, research, legislative and administrative advocacy, and communications. In January 2022, the Council and New American Economy merged to combine a broad suite of advocacy tools to better expand and protect the rights of immigrants, more fully ensure immigrants’ ability to succeed economically, and help make the communities they settle in more welcoming. Follow the latest Council news and information on BlueSky @immcouncil.org and Instagram at @immcouncil. 

The post National Immigrant Rights Organizations Sue the Federal Government Over Withheld Records on ICE Arrests in Immigration Courts   appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/rbd0us2
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

Legal Groups File Emergency Motion to Stop ICE from Jailing Immigrant Teens in Adult Detention

Washington, D.C, October 4 — Advocacy groups the American Immigration Council and the National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC) filed an emergency motion on October 4, seeking to enforce a 2021 court ruling (in the Garcia Ramirez v. ICE case) that prevents ICE from illegally locking up unaccompanied immigrant children in adult detention centers once they turn 18. 

The Council and NIJC filed the motion after multiple documented cases emerged in which ICE resumed its practice of seeking to transfer immigrant children who entered the U.S. alone into adult detention facilities once they turned 18, in violation of the permanent injunction in the Garcia Ramirez case.

“The permanent injunction made clear that ICE cannot automatically transfer young people to adult detention centers simply because they have turned 18,” said Michelle Lapointe, legal director at the American Immigration Council. “Locking up these young people in ICE jails rife with overcrowding and hazardous conditions, and far from their support systems, does nothing to make our communities safer, it only inflicts more harm on vulnerable youth.”

When children under 18 enter the United States alone, they are placed in shelters run by the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) and are generally released to family members or other vetted sponsors in the U.S., not to ICE detention centers. These policies recognize that children need care and support, not punishment. 

Under the Garcia Ramirez court ruling that resulted from yearslong litigation by the NIJC and the Council and a lengthy bench trial, once these youths turn 18, ICE must consider placement in the least restrictive setting, like an alternative-to-detention program, rather than throwing them into immigration detention. 

“ICE’s attempt to expand the detention of immigrant youth is a direct violation of the courts, which explicitly requires the agency to consider safe, less restrictive alternatives to detention,” said Mark Fleming, associate director of litigation at the National Immigrant Justice Center. “We will not allow the government to turn back the clock and return to a practice that the courts have already found unlawful.”

The number of people in immigration detention has reached record highs, fueling overcrowding and abusive conditions. The Trump administration is weaponizing the threat of prolonged confinement in these dangerous facilities to coerce people into giving up their legal rights and accepting deportation. This pressure campaign is being reinforced by new policies such as a program offering financial payments to unaccompanied youths if they agree to leave the country.

“The law is clear: ICE must use safe, less restrictive alternatives, not default to jailing young people indefinitely,” said Marie Silver, managing attorney for NIJC’s Immigrant Children’s Protection Project. “These kids came here seeking safety and hope. They deserve a chance to be free and reunify with family and community members, attend school, and work with their lawyers to have their day in court. Trapping them in dangerous and degrading conditions in immigration detention is compounding their trauma in a cruel and unnecessary way.”

The post Legal Groups File Emergency Motion to Stop ICE from Jailing Immigrant Teens in Adult Detention appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/OZsYBhR
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant