FILTERS
- Age Discrimination
- Disability Discrimination
- Diversity in Employment
- Diversity in the General Counsel’s Office
- Enforcement of Non-Discrimination Laws
- Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
- Gender Identity & Sexual Orientation Discrimination
- Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA)
- Race and National Origin Discrimination
- Religious Discrimination & Accommodation
- Retaliation
- Sex Discrimination
- Veterans Discrimination
- Academic Freedom & Employee Speech
- Background Checks & Employee Verification
- Collective Bargaining
- Diversity in Employment
- Employee Benefits
- Employee Discipline & Due Process
- Employee Sexual Misconduct
- Employment of Foreign Nationals
- Employment Separation, RIFs, ERIPs & Retrenchment
- Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) & Categorization of Employees
- Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
- Intellectual Property
- Reproductive Health Issues
- Research
- Retaliation
- Tenure
- Veterans & Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA)
- Diversity in the General Counsel’s Office
- Ethical Obligations of Higher Education Lawyers
- Evaluation of Operations & Staff in the General Counsel’s Office
- External Counsel
- Law Office Management
- Law Office Technology
- Law Office Training
- Roles & Responsibilities of the General Counsel
- Wellness & Stress Management
- Academic Performance and Misconduct
- Admissions
- Distressed & Suicidal Students
- Financial Aid, Scholarships, & Student Loans
- Hazing
- Internships, Externships, & Clinical Work
- Student Athlete Issues
- Student Conduct
- Student Housing
- Student Organizations
- Student Speech & Campus Unrest
- Title IX & Student Sexual Misconduct
- Uncategorized
Latest Cases & Developments
Date:
OCR Investigation of Louisiana Board of Regents Over Alleged Race-Based Priority in Master Plan (Feb. 13, 2026)
The Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) announced that it has initiated a directed investigation into the Louisiana Board of Regents to determine whether its Master Plan for Higher Education violates Title VI by authorizing “racially-exclusionary” practices and initiatives. Specifically, OCR alleges the Board’s executive budgets have included performance objectives requiring schools to prioritize non-white and non-Asian students and sets a target to raise matriculation and graduation of these students from a baseline of 14,579 in 2020–21 to 16,000 in 2025–26. OCR wrote that this objective to “prioritize recruitment and graduation efforts for all races other than white and Asian appears to blatantly violate not only America’s antidiscrimination laws but our nation’s core principles.”
Topics:
Admissions | Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Enforcement of Non-Discrimination Laws | Race and National Origin Discrimination | StudentsDate:
Department of Education NPRM on Graduate Student Loan Eligibility (Jan. 30, 2026)
The Department of Education issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) which would establish new loan limits for graduate students, professional students, and parents, and phase out the Graduate PLUS Program. The proposal would also phase out existing Income-Contingent Repayment (ICR) plans, create a new tiered standard repayment plan option, and implement a new income-driven repayment plan known as the Repayment Assistant Plan. This action follows the Department’s announcement in November that the negotiators of the Reimagining and Improving Student Education (RISE) committee reached consensus on a definition of a professional degree. Comments are due by March 2, 2026 and, if finalized, the policy is set to take effect July 1, 2026.
Topics:
Financial Aid, Scholarships, & Student Loans | StudentsDate:
Department of Education’s OCR Resolution Agreement with San Jose State University for Title IX Violations (Jan. 28, 2026)
The Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) announced that it has found San Jose State University in violation of Title IX for allowing “males to compete in women’s sports and access female-only facilities.” The investigation, which began in February 2025, arose from allegations involving a student competing on the women’s indoor volleyball team and alleged retaliation against female athletes and an assistant coach who criticized the university’s gender identity policies. OCR also concluded that the university failed to promptly and equitably investigate Title IX complaints and took actions that discouraged women from participating in the Title IX process. The resolution agreement requires the university to: (1) “adopt biology-based definitions of male and female”; (2) separate athletics and intimate facilities based on biological sex; (3) refrain from delegating Title IX compliance to external entities and refuse to contract with any entity that discriminates on the basis of sex; (4) restore misappropriated athletic records and titles to female athletes; and (5) issue personalized apologies to affected female athletes, including athletes from other universities who forfeited their right to compete against the university.
Topics:
Athletics & Sports | Gender Equity in Athletics | Students | Title IX & Student Sexual MisconductDate:
American Federation of Teachers, et al., v. U.S. Department of Education, et al. (4th Cir. Jan. 21, 2026)
The Department of Education dropped its appeal of an August 2025 federal court ruling that blocked the Department’s February 14, 2025 Dear Colleague Letter and a related requirement that school districts certify they do not engage in “illegal DEI” practices. With this withdrawal, the district court’s decision will stand.
Topics:
Admissions | Constitutional Issues | Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Diversity in Employment | Due Process | Financial Aid, Scholarships, & Student Loans | First Amendment & Free Speech | Race and National Origin Discrimination | StudentsDate:
Department of Education Program Participation Agreement Signature Requirements (Jan. 16, 2026)
The Department of Education Office of Federal Student Aid announced that in response to a challenge to the legality of 34 C.F.R. § 668.14, which requires an owner-entity of an institution of higher education to sign a Program Participation Agreement (PPA), the Secretary of Education has agreed to no longer enforce the owner-entity signature requirement. The change in enforcement follows the Department’s settlement in Hannibal-LaGrange University v. Department of Education (E.D. Mo. 2025). Moving forward, enforcement of the provision will be on a case-by-case basis, and the Department also indicated that it intends to revise the regulation consistent with the results of the settlement agreement.
Topics:
Financial Aid, Scholarships, & Student Loans | StudentsDate:
ACE Comments on the Department of Education’s Proposed Revisions to the Accreditation Handbook (Jan. 26, 2026)
The Department of Education Office of Federal Student Aid announced that in response to a challenge to the legality of 34 C.F.R. § 668.14, which requires an owner-entity of an institution of higher education to sign a Program Participation Agreement (PPA), the Secretary of Education has agreed to no longer enforce the owner-entity signature requirement. The change in enforcement follows the Department’s settlement in Hannibal-LaGrange University v. Department of Education (E.D. Mo. 2025). Moving forward, enforcement of the provision will be on a case-by-case basis, and the Department also indicated that it intends to revise the regulation consistent with the results of the settlement agreement.
Topics:
Financial Aid, Scholarships, & Student Loans | StudentsDate:
Corzo v. Brown Univ. (N.D. Ill. Jan. 12, 2026)
Opinion and Order Denying Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiffs, a putative class of alumni from 17 selective universities, sued the universities for violating section 1 of the Sherman Act, alleging that the schools colluded through the “568 Presidents Group” to standardize financial-aid calculations in ways that reduced competition and raised prices for students receiving aid. The court held that plaintiffs presented sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to conclude there was an antitrust violation, finding (1) the universities “agreed on the Consensus Approach to avoid bidding wars and then adhered to it”; (2) the universities held “high enough market shares to infer market power”; and (3) plaintiffs had “suffered an injury when they paid too much.” The court rejected the universities’ section 568 antitrust exemption defense, reasoning that the defense did not apply because some of the universities in the Presidents Group were not admitting students on a “need blind” basis. While several universities maintained that they were still need blind, the court rejected this argument as unpersuasive and contrary to the statutory text, finding that plaintiffs had demonstrated their processes favored wealthier applicants.
Topics:
Antitrust | Financial Aid, Scholarships, & Student Loans | Students | Taxes & FinancesDate:
Virginia AG and DOJ Submit Joint Settlement Agreement to enjoin enforcement of Virginia Dream Act (E.D. Va. Dec. 30, 2025)
In late December, the federal government sued the Commonwealth of Virginia challenging the Virginia Dream Act, which provides in-state tuition and financial assistance to undocumented students. The Department of Justice (DOJ) alleges that the law discriminates against U.S. citizens “who are not afforded the same reduced tuition rates, scholarships, or subsidies, [and] create[s] incentives for illegal immigration, and reward[s] illegal immigrants with benefits that U.S. citizens are not eligible for.” A day after the complaint was filed, the Virginia Attorney General and the DOJ submitted a joint motion for consent judgment to the court, which, if approved, would deem the law unconstitutional and bar state authorities from enforcing it. The lawsuit follows two Executive Orders signed by President Trump last year: “Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Open Borders” and “Protecting American Communities from Criminal Aliens.” A copy of the complaint can be found here.
Topics:
Financial Aid, Scholarships, & Student Loans | Immigration | International Students | StudentsDate:
ACE Letter to Department of Education on Proposed Admissions Data Information Collection Request (Dec. 15, 2025)
The American Council on Education (ACE) sent a comment letter to the Department of Education reiterating its strong opposition to the Admissions and Consumer Transparency Supplement (ACTS) survey component and raising new concerns based on information contained in the Department’s November 13 Information Collection Request (ICR). Specifically, ACE notes the ICR’s imposition of a March 18, 2026 deadline – merely three months from now – for institutions to submit completed ACTS surveys covering seven years of admissions-related data. The letter also expresses concern with language indicating that institutions that fail to submit completed surveys by the deadline may face fines of up to $71,545 for each violation. ACE’s prior letter to the Department outlining additional concerns with the ACTS survey component, may be found here.
Topics:
Admissions | StudentsDate:
Department of Education Announces Agreement with Missouri to End SAVE Plan (Dec. 9, 2025)
The Department of Education announced a proposed legal settlement with Missouri that would end the “Saving on a Valuable Education” (SAVE) Plan. Under the proposed agreement, the Department would deny any pending applications for the SAVE Plan, prohibit future enrollment of borrowers in the plan, and move all current SAVE borrowers into other repayment plans. The Department has also agreed to hold a negotiated rulemaking session to remove the SAVE Plan from federal regulations, apart from the forbearance and deferment provisions that were included in the final SAVE Plan rule that will continue to count for Income-Driven Repayment (IDR) forgiveness. The Department is still awaiting approval from the court. A copy of the settlement agreement can be found here.
Topics:
Financial Aid, Scholarships, & Student Loans | Students
NACUA Annual Conference
Join us in the Music City June 29 – July 2 to connect, learn, and lead alongside higher education attorneys shaping policy, practice, and impact nationwide together.