A Fight For Equal Rights: Why Do We Celebrate International Women's Day? (NDTV)

 

 

It's March 8, a day designated to celebrate women and to honour their existence and their contribution in this world. So today, let us take a moment to appreciate all the ladies in our lives. This day is the fruit of the labour of thousands of women who fought for equal rights, spoke up against mistreatment and demanded equal footing with men. While the struggle is centuries old, the idea of women's day first emerged at the turn of the 20th century. NDTV's Arzoo Tanwar tells you more.

Political Attacks on Higher Education (AAUP)

The Trump administration and many state governments are accelerating attacks on academic freedom, shared governance, and higher education as a public good. We are working with our chapters and with allies in higher ed and the labor movement to defend and advance our vision: Higher education that is accessible and affordable for all who want it. Freedom to teach, to learn, to conduct research, to speak out on issues of the day, and to assemble in the organizations of our choice. Colleges and universities that create opportunity for students, workers, and communities. Sufficient funding to provide true education and sustainable working conditions. Information and resources to help in this fight are being added below as they are developed.

Immigration

• We need to know what is happening on your campus so we can legally and strategically respond. Please let us know what is going on by using this intake form.
• Fact sheet on dealing with ICE on your campus (AAUP General Counsel)
• Fact sheet on rights and risks for workers who are in the United States on visas (American Federation of Teachers)
• Issue brief on immigration-related campus concerns (American Council on Education)
• Know Your Rights flyers (AFL-CIO)
• Family preparedness plan template (Immigrant Legal Resource Center)

Attacks on Science and Research

• Support for Researchers Facing Coordinated Campaigns of Intimidation and Harassment (Researcher Support Consortium)

Federal Funding 

• A Win for the AAUP, Higher Ed, and Our Communities
  AAUP Seeks Restraining Order on Termination of Grants
• Federal Funding Freeze Impact Survey (Higher Ed Labor United)
• Trump’s DEI order leaves academic researchers fearful of political influence over grants (Associated Press)
• Fact sheet on privatizing K-12 education (AAUP Center for the Defense of Academic Freedom)

Accreditation

• Accreditation: What to Expect in 2025 (American Federation of Teachers)

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

• A Win for the AAUP, Higher Ed, and Our Communities
• AAUP Seeks Restraining Order on Termination of Grants
• AAUP Joins Lawsuit to Block Trump’s Unlawful and Unconstitutional DEI Orders
• Fact sheet on diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (AAUP Center for the Defense of Academic Freedom)
• Fact sheet on DEI in K-12 (AAUP Center for the Defense of Academic Freedom)
• Fact sheet on antisemitism (AAUP Center for the Defense of Academic Freedom)
• Fact sheet on weaponizing civil rights law (AAUP Center for the Defense of Academic Freedom)
• Fact sheet on gender identity (AAUP Center for the Defense of Academic Freedom)

Anticipatory Obedience

Administrations sometimes go farther than the law requires to placate those who are attacking higher ed.

• Statement Against Anticipatory Obedience, with recommendations (AAUP)

College student's classroom is the farm where he works (CBS Evening News)

At a time when college is unaffordable for many, some schools are re-imagining higher education, shifting their curricula from general knowledge to providing free training for specific jobs. Mark Strassmann reports from Merced, California.

Boycott Amazon March 7-14, 2025.

Please observe the boycott of Amazon from March 7-14, 2025.  This is a step up from the one-day boycotts on February 28.  Boycotts are an essential tool of nonviolent resistance and one way to make your voices heard.  

Trump Invites Wealthy Foreigners to Become US Citizens

In his State of the Union message last night, President Trump reaffirmed his interest in encouraging rich people from around the world to become US citizens.  The price of US Gold Cards, and a path to citizenship, will be $5M per person. Trump added that these Gold Card members would not have to pay taxes to their native countries.  

Watch DOGE Dismantle US Department of Education in Real Time

The US Department of Government Efficiency regularly posts cuts to all US federal agencies, including the US Department of Education, which it is working on to dismantle. The cuts include "asset sales, contract/lease cancellations and renegotiations, fraud and improper payment deletion, grant cancellations, interest savings, programmatic changes, regulatory savings, and workforce reductions."

As of March 4, 2025, DOGE has reduced ED regulations by 1.25 million words and approximately 3,340 sections of regulation.  according to DOGE, ED has 4,245 employees making an average of $140,000 per year.  The average employee is 49 years of age and has worked for the Department for 13 years.  The total cost of employee wages is $596M per year. 

 Here's a sample of the current list of Department of Education contracts cut by DOGE. 

 

Trump and DOGE Decimate Department of Education Office of Inspector General

According to our sources at the US Department of Education, the number of personnel in its Office of Inspector General (OIG) is down approximately 14 percent from January 1, 2025.  The number of workers there could be further reduced as President Trump issues his austerity budget. The current loses at ED-OIG include retirements, those who have chosen to be part of the deferred resignation program, and those who left the organization for positions elsewhere. While this cutting may reduce personnel costs, what will happen with less OIG workers to oversee the proper use of federal funds?  Will this embolden bad actors, including predatory schools and debt servicers?  We're guessing it does.      

The Future of Federal Student Loans

The U.S. student loan system, now exceeding $1.7 trillion in debt and affecting over 40 million borrowers, is facing significant challenges. As political pressures rise, the management of student loans could be significantly altered. A combination of potential privatization, the elimination of the U.S. Department of Education (ED), and a new role for the Department of the Treasury raises critical questions about the future of the system.

U.S. Department of Education: Strained Resources and Outsourcing

The U.S. Department of Education (ED) is responsible for managing federal student loan servicing, loan forgiveness programs, and borrower defense to repayment (BDR) claims. However, ED has faced ongoing issues with understaffing and inefficiency, particularly as many functions have been outsourced to contractors. Companies like Maximus (including subsidiaries like AidVantage) manage much of the administrative burden for loan servicing. This has raised concerns about accountability and the impact on borrowers, especially those seeking loan relief.

In recent years, ED has also experienced staff reductions and funding cuts, making it difficult to process claims or maintain high-quality service. The potential for further cuts or even the elimination of the department could exacerbate these problems. If ED’s role is diminished, other entities, such as the Department of the Treasury, could assume responsibility for managing the student loan portfolio, though this would present its own set of challenges.

Potential for Privatization of the Student Loan Portfolio

One of the most discussed options for addressing the student loan crisis is the privatization of the federal student loan portfolio. Under previous administration discussions, including those during President Trump’s tenure, there were talks about selling off parts of the student loan portfolio to private companies. This would be done with the aim of reducing the federal deficit.

In 2019, McKinsey & Company was hired by the Trump administration to analyze the value of the student loan portfolio, considering factors such as default rates and economic conditions. While the report's findings were never made public, the idea of transferring the loans to private companies—such as banks or investment firms—remains a possibility.

The consequences of privatizing federal student loans could be significant. Private companies would likely focus on profitability, which could result in stricter repayment terms or less flexibility for borrowers seeking loan forgiveness or other relief options. This shift may reduce borrower protections, making it harder for students to challenge repayment terms or pursue loan discharges.

The Department of the Treasury and its Potential Role

If the U.S. Department of Education is restructured or eliminated, there is a possibility that the Department of the Treasury could step in to manage some aspects of the student loan portfolio. The Treasury is responsible for the country’s financial systems and debt management, so it could, in theory, handle the federal student loan portfolio from a financial oversight perspective.

However, while the Treasury has experience in financial management, it lacks the specialized knowledge of student loans and borrower protections that the Department of Education currently provides. For example, the Treasury would need to find ways to process complex Borrower Defense to Repayment claims, a responsibility ED currently manages. In 2023, over 750,000 Borrower Defense claims were pending, with thousands of claims related to predatory practices at for-profit colleges such as University of Phoenix, ITT Tech, and Kaplan University (now known as Purdue Global). Additionally, some of these for-profit schools were able to reorganize and continue operating under different names, further complicating the situation.

The Treasury could also contract out loan servicing, but this could increase reliance on profit-driven companies, possibly compromising the interests of borrowers in favor of financial performance.

Borrower Defense Claims and the Impact of For-Profit Schools

A large portion of the Borrower Defense to Repayment claims comes from students who attended for-profit colleges with a history of deceptive practices. These institutions, often referred to as subprime colleges, misled students about job prospects, program outcomes, and accreditation, leaving many with significant student debt but poor employment outcomes.

Data from 2023 revealed that over 750,000 Borrower Defense claims were filed with the Department of Education, many of them against for-profit institutions. The Sweet v. Cardona case showed that more than 200,000 borrowers were expected to receive debt relief after years of waiting. However, the process was slow, with an estimated 16,000 new claims being filed each month, and only 35 ED workers handling these claims. These delays, combined with the uncertainty around the future of ED, leave borrowers vulnerable to prolonged financial hardship. 

Lack of Transparency and Accountability in the System

While the U.S. Department of Education tracks Borrower Defense claims, it does not publish institutional-level data, making it difficult to identify which schools are responsible for the most fraudulent activity. 

In response to this, FOIA requests have been filed by organizations like the National Student Legal Defense Network and the Higher Education Inquirer to obtain detailed information about which institutions are disproportionately affecting borrowers. 

In one such request, the Higher Education Inquirer asked for information regarding claims filed against the University of Phoenix, a school with a significant number of Borrower Defense claims.

The lack of transparency in the system makes it harder for borrowers to make informed decisions about which institutions to attend and limits accountability for schools that have harmed students. If the Treasury or private companies take over management of the loan portfolio, these transparency issues could worsen, as private entities are less likely to prioritize public accountability.

Conclusion

The future of the U.S. student loan system is uncertain, particularly as the Department of Education faces the potential of funding cuts, staff reductions, or even complete dissolution. If ED’s role diminishes or disappears, the Department of the Treasury could take over some functions, but this would raise questions about the fairness and transparency of the system.

The possibility of privatizing the student loan portfolio also looms large, which could shift the focus away from borrower protections and toward financial gain for private companies. For-profit schools, many of which have a history of predatory practices, are responsible for a disproportionate number of Borrower Defense claims, and any move to privatize the loan portfolio could exacerbate the challenges faced by borrowers seeking relief from these institutions.

Ultimately, there is a need for greater transparency and accountability in how the student loan system operates. Whether managed by the Department of Education, the Treasury, or private companies, protecting borrowers and ensuring fairness should remain central to any future reforms. If these issues are not addressed, millions of borrowers will continue to face significant financial hardship.

Announcing Our New Student Basic Needs Survey Report (The Hope Center, Temple University)

Our long-awaited report shares findings from 91 institutions across 16 states that participated in Hope Impact Partnerships (HIP) and fielded The Hope Center Student Basic Needs Survey between Spring 2023 and Summer 2024. 

 

 

Read the Report

Help Us Spread the Word 

 

 

 

 

Living Joyfully: Teachings by Thich Nhat Hanh (Plum Village)

The Theory of Stupidity: Dietrich Bonhoeffer (Mirror of Being)

 

Higher Education Inquirer Approaches Half Million Views