Skip to Main Content
Click here for all of EducationCounsel’s resources related to federal executive actions affecting education and child services.

E-Updates

Share on LinkedIn Download PDF

Nov. 3, 2026

E-Update for November 3, 2026

Note: Our biweekly E-Updates provide briefings on action across the Administration, Congress, and U.S. Courts. EducationCounsel’s resources specifically related to the Administration’s executive actions are available by clicking here.

The information included in this publication occurred during the time period of October 16 2026, through October 29, 2026.

Highlights:

  • On October 29, USED issued final regulations to overhaul regulations governing higher education accreditors.
  • On October 22, the House Committee on Education and Workforce held a field hearing titled, “More Choices, Brighter Futures: Expanding Education Freedom,” at Northampton Community College in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, to examine school choice, charter schools, and federal policies intended to expand educational options, including the new Federal Scholarship Tax Credit (FSTC). 
  • On October 19, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a challenge to Montgomery County Board of Education’s (MCPS) admissions process for a group of highly-selective public magnet schools in the Maryland school district. The Court indicated it will hear arguments specifically on the question of “whether a plaintiff challenging a facially neutral admissions policy as racially discriminatory must establish that the targeted racial group suffered an aggregate disparate impact relative to its share of the applicant pool.”
     

Administration
 

U.S. Department of Education (USED):

USED Finalizes Accreditation Regulations: On October 29, USED issued final regulations to overhaul regulations governing higher education accreditors. The final regulations are largely unchanged from the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), which “publish[ed] the agreed-upon regulations” (or consensus regulations) that emerged from the negotiated rulemaking process that took place earlier this year (for more information, see EducationCounsel’s May 29, 2026 Alert for a detailed analysis of these consensus regulations). These regulations, which are a significant modification of prior regulations, are important because accreditation is a prerequisite for postsecondary institutions and their students to access federal student aid such as Pell Grants and student loans. Under the final regulations, prospective accreditors will now face a much lower bar to initial recognition, which means schools will more easily be able to switch accreditors to avoid sanction or scrutiny. Once recognized, accreditors will also face several new federal requirements, including ones that open the door to federal government review of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. As the final regulations were published prior to November 1, the final rule will be effective on July 1, 2027. Additional analysis of the final regulations will be forthcoming.

USED Secretary McMahon Highlights Trump Administration’s Education Accomplishments and Outlines Administration’s Vision for the Next 250 Years of American Education: On October 20, USED Secretary Linda McMahon kicked off a four-part speaking series -- “The Next 250: American Education” -- to highlight the Trump Administration’s K-12 education, workforce, and higher education accomplishments, and to lay out the Administration’s vision for the next 250 years of education. Specifically, the Secretary used the series of speeches to call for greater state and local control, expanded educational choice, foundational academic skills, workforce preparation, and college affordability and accountability.
 
In her first speech focused on the Trump Administration’s K-12 accomplishments at the American Preparatory Academy in Salt Lake City, UT, she outlined support for strengthening reading, writing, mathematics, and critical thinking; supporting literacy instruction and students with disabilities; promoting parental rights and school choice; and reducing federal oversight. Her speech also highlighted the Trump Administration’s efforts to return education authority to state and local leaders and expand education choice, including through the Federal Scholarship Tax Credit. The Secretary’s full remarks are here. At the College of Southern Nevada in Las Vegas, NV, Secretary McMahon delivered her second speech focused on the workforce accomplishments of the Trump Administration. She highlighted career and technical education, registered apprenticeships, affordable workforce training, and Workforce Pell Grants as ways to prepare students for in-demand jobs without requiring a traditional four-year degree. The Secretary’s full remarks are here.

In her third and final speeches of the series, Secretary McMahon focused on higher education with remarks on affordability in higher education and restoring public trust in higher education respectively. At Arizona State University (ASU), she discussed making higher education more affordable and transparent, improving accountability for student outcomes, reforming student loan repayment, and expanding career-focused pathways, praising ASU as a model for providing quality education at a reasonable cost. The Secretary’s full remarks are here. Finally, while speaking at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, TN, Secretary McMahon called on colleges and universities to restore merit, remove ideological litmus tests from hiring and admissions, and promote intellectual diversity, and it details how the Administration’s accountability agenda is already driving positive change. Across her remarks, McMahon emphasized that education should offer flexible, affordable pathways to academic achievement and economic opportunity while giving families, educators, states, and local communities a greater role in decision-making. The Secretary’s full remarks are here.
 
USED Secretary McMahon Visits Washington as Part of Returning Education to the States Tour: On October 19, USED Secretary McMahon continued her efforts to highlight the Trump Administration’s efforts to reshape American education through her nationwide “Returning Education to the States Tour.” During her 46th tour stop in Washington state, she visited King’s Schools and Chesterton Academy of Notre Dame and joined Representative Michael Baumgartner (R-WA) in encouraging Governor Bob Ferguson (D) to participate in the Federal Scholarship Tax Credit program.

USED Approves Workforce Pell Grant Program in Arizona: On October 22, USED announced that it approved a new Workforce Pell Grant program in Arizona, marking the seventh state to receive a program approval. Eligible students at Pima Medical Institute are now able to use federal Pell Grant funds to enroll in the phlebotomy technician program, a training program designed to prepare students for specialized healthcare careers. Created by the One Big, Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), the Workforce Pell Grant program allows the use of federal Pell Grants to support short-term, job-focused training programs in high-demand fields. In 2025, the Department conducted negotiated rulemaking to establish the regulatory framework for the Workforce Pell Grant program. The final rule implementing the program was published on May 18, 2026, and the program launched on July 1, 2026. The Department first approved a Workforce Pell program in Iowa and has since approved programs in Indiana, Nebraska, North Carolina, Texas, Florida, and now Arizona. 

USED Imposes Restrictions on Cosmetology Accreditor: On October 21, Under Secretary of Education Nicholas Kent (serving in the capacity of Senior Department Official) issued a decision letter to the National Accrediting Commission of Career Arts and Sciences (NACCAS), a major accreditor of cosmetology and career arts institutions. USED did not deny NACCAS federal recognition as the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality (NACIQI) had recommended in a 9-3 vote on July 22 (see EducationCounsel’s July 23, 2026 Alert for more on the initial recommendation). Instead, USED prohibited NACCAS from adding new members and indicated the accreditor could face more severe penalties if it did not address a number of concerns over the next year. As background, several members of NACIQI noted prior to the Committee’s vote that NACCAS was not meeting 17 federal recognition criteria, including achievement standards (such as graduation rates and job placement rates) and maintaining transparency with its accredited institutions. Separately, USED also imposed similar restrictions on the Council on Occupational Education on October 21, although in that case the decision letter went further than NACIQI had recommended.

University of North Carolina Settles with Trump Administration over Civil Rights Investigations: On October 19, USED’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) and the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division jointly announced a resolution agreement with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) to address allegations that UNC impermissibly used race or racial proxies in its admissions; failed to maintain “race-blind policies” regarding student benefits, scholarships, financial aid, and more; and failed to address a hostile learning environment for Jewish and Israeli students. While UNC did not admit any wrongdoing, the agreement requires the university to make significant changes to its policies and programs as well as to hire or designate staff to implement those commitments. In many areas, the terms of the agreement impose conditions not reflected in past publicly reported DOJ resolution agreements addressing these issues. (See EducationCounsel’s December 2, 2025 Alert for more information on those agreements.) Several elements also appear to be more restrictive than federal law requires, including establishing a “wholly race-blind” selection process; barring any examination of racial data as part of analyzing its admissions process; prohibiting any admissions policy actions undertaken for the purpose of changing the student body’s racial makeup; and blanketly precluding the consideration of race in recruitment efforts.
 
USED and DOJ Rescind Guidance on English Learner Students, LEP Parents & Race in School Discipline: On October 23, USED’s OCR and DOJ’s CRT issued a notice “to clarify that seven guidance documents issued jointly by the Departments are not enforceable.” Issued between 2015 and 2023, the seven documents all address nondiscrimination requirements in federally funded programs:

Although guidance documents typically do not have the force of law, they are instructive for schools and universities seeking to meet their legal obligations under federal civil rights and provide consistent nationwide interpretation for enforcement staff. The new notice, however, states that OCR and CRT are “concerned about confusion over the nonenforceable nature of the guidance documents.” No additional explanation for rescinding these specific documents is provided, but the agencies conclude by noting “the Departments plan to revisit the guidance documents listed in this notice in light of [the Supreme Court’s decision in] Loper Bright to determine whether they are consistent with the ‘single, best meaning’ of the relevant federal civil rights laws enforced by the Departments.” In the meantime, neither OCR or CRT will rely on the seven documents in their enforcement actions, and education leaders thus cannot rely on the now-rescinded guidance as a defense.

USED Announces New National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) Members and Reappoints Chair: On October 27, USED Secretary McMahon announced six new appointments to the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reappointed Tennessee State Representative Mark White (R) as Board Chair. The new members are Arkansas Secretary of Education Jacob Oliva; Mississippi high school principal Jacob Dykes; Colorado eighth-grade math teacher Mark Miller; Missouri assessment and literacy expert Dr. Melia Franklin; Arizona charter school executive and state representative Michael Way; (R) and New Jersey elementary educator Lauren Archer. NAGB’s 26-seat board oversees the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), known as the Nation’s Report Card, including setting achievement levels and determining which grades and content are included in the assessments.
 
DOJ and USED Take Enforcement Actions on Parents’ Rights to Review Surveys, Curricula, and Gender Support Plans: The Administration, including USED’s Student Privacy Policy Office (SPPO), which enforces the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA), continues to lean into investigations related to parental consent and access to information. (See EducationCounsel’s September 3, 2026 Alert for analysis of SPPO’s recent Dear Colleague Letter on the scope of these laws.)

First, on October 26, USED announced that SPPO has opened investigations into three California school districts to determine whether students were asked to share personal information about themselves as part of the state’s Ethnic Studies program without prior parental notice and approval, as SPPO claims is required by PPRA in this context. In public statements, district leaders have disputed the allegations in USED’s press release and noted that students are not required to participate in “privilege surveys” or other exercises. These investigations are notable as they focus on “DEIA” curriculum rather than the Administration’s primary focus on school policies related to religious opt-outs or gender support plans.
 
Second, on October 27, the DOJ Civil Rights Division announced it has filed a lawsuit against the Anne Arundel County Public Schools (AACPS) alleging that the Maryland district’s policies and practices regarding parents’ access to information about their children’s gender identity at school violate FERPA and PPRA. DOJ asserts that the school district has violated PPRA by implementing a policy that in certain circumstances—when the principal determines “there is a genuine safety concern for the student’s physical, emotional, or mental health safety”—limits involvement of a student’s parents in the “plan to accommodate and support the student and their gender identity.” DOJ argues that such a policy requires school staff to solicit protected information from that student that would otherwise be covered by the PPRA and thus would require parental notice and approval. DOJ proceeded with the lawsuit despite AACPS updating the policies under investigation.
 

U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce):

Commerce Proposes Changes to Census that Could Affect Education Data and Funding: On September 10, the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Census Bureau proposed a number of changes to the decennial census, several of which would affect the accuracy of data used in public education. If finalized, Commerce’s proposal would exclude most noncitizens from the census, including undocumented children. Because the decennial census informs the population estimates that the federal government uses to distribute education funds via formula (such as Title I and IDEA), any inaccuracies in the count could lead to underfunding of some school districts. Another part of the proposed rule would bar questions about race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation from appearing on the census form. Undercounting certain populations of students in the census would also likely compromise other education surveys and research that rely on the decennial census for accurate data. Public comments closed on November 2, with over 140,000 comments having been submitted.
 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS):

HHS Seeks Public Comments on Proposed State Child Care Plan Template: Every three years, each state and territory submits a Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) Plan describing how it runs its child care assistance program. The Office of Child Care within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has released a draft CCDF state plan template for use starting in fiscal year (FY) 2028. HHS indicates that the revisions will streamline questions, reduce data entry and administrative burden, and strengthen program integrity. Public comments can be submitted here through December 22. 

HHS has proposed adding questions on fraud prevention, internal controls, and payment accuracy. For instance, states would be required to explain how they confirm a family’s eligibility, using electronic data to verify information. The agency also proposes that states provide their own definitions of fraud and describe how they investigate it and recover funds. The template removes questions tied to CCDF requirements rescinded in May 2026, including the 7% co-payment cap, paying providers in advance, paying based on enrollment, and using grants or contracts. States may keep these policies in place but are no longer required to do so by the federal government. Sections requiring information on compliance with the statute’s obligations relating to health and safety, background checks, and 12-month eligibility remain largely unchanged.

 

U.S. Department of Labor (DOL):

U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) Announces Over $80 Million in Grants for Rural Job Training Programs: On October 16, DOL announced $81.5 million in grant awards to support industry-driven job training programs in rural communities within the Appalachian, Delta, and Northern Border regions. This is the seventh round of grants under the Workforce Opportunity for Rural Communities (WORC) program, administered by DOL’s Employment and Training Administration. This latest tranche of grants will support 13 projects in 11 states with the goal of increasing employment, wage growth, economic mobility, self-sufficiency, and increased labor force participation. These specific demonstration grants are meant to support the needs of the employers in the rural areas of these regions to help them compete economically and to allow residents to hold family-sustaining employment opportunities. The program will provide training, including registered apprenticeships, and will focus on emerging and high-growth industry sectors such as skilled trades, healthcare, information technology, manufacturing, and business and professional services. The WORC initiative is conducted in partnership with the Appalachian Regional Commission, the Delta Regional Authority, and the Northern Border Regional Commission.
 

Congress:

 
Senate:

Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee Chair Cassidy and Senator Heinrich Introduce Bipartisan Legislation to Support Children with Dyslexia, Improve Literacy: On October 20, Senate HELP Committee Chair Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and Senator Martin Heinrich (D-NM) introduced S. 5659, the “Literacy Improvement for Transformation (LIFT) Act of 2026” to improve reading proficiency and expand support for children with dyslexia and other reading difficulties. The legislation would establish a competitive federal grant program to help schools recruit, hire, train, and retain qualified reading and literacy specialists, with the goal of ensuring that every K–12 public school has at least one full-time specialist. Grant funding could also support professional development, evidence-based literacy certifications, early reading interventions, and increased salaries to retain specialists. The bill requires specialists funded through the grants to spend at least 80% of their time working directly with students and teachers, and prioritizes support for struggling readers, students with disabilities, and schools with greater literacy needs. 
 
Chair Cassidy has made dyslexia a focus for the HELP Committee during his chairmanship. S. 3010, the “21st Century Dyslexia Act,” which is authored by Chair Cassidy and advanced out of the Senate HELP Committee in July, aims to improve diagnoses for individuals with dyslexia and enhance access to evidence-based interventions and resources. Additionally, S. 4689, the “Reading Excellence and Achievement for Development (READ) Act,” which is a comprehensive, bipartisan bill aimed at strengthening evidence-based literacy instruction, requiring early literacy screening, and strengthening state resources that was introduced by Chair Cassidy and Senators Maggie Hassan (D-NH) and John Hickenlooper (D-CO), also passed out of the Senate HELP committee in July. Chair Cassidy has indicated previously that he will seek to pass S. 4689 by unanimous consent in the Senate, but it is unclear if this may be possible without objection. Separately, the House passed H.R. 7890, the “Science of Reading Act of 2026,” which is a more narrow, bipartisan bill that would prioritize evidence-based literacy instruction, in September.

Democratic Senate Finance Committee Release Draft Legislation Aimed at Addressing AI Disruptions for Workers: On October 23, Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-OR) introduced “The Stability and Opportunity for Workers Act,” which is a draft bill aimed at increasing wage security for American workers. The bill is co-sponsored by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Senators Michael Bennet (D-CO) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA). The Stability and Opportunity for Workers Act seeks to enhance the existing Unemployment Insurance system by lengthening the federal-state Extended Benefits program to provide up to 52 additional weeks of unemployment insurance benefits, creating new minimum standards for benefits, expanding the types of workers covered by regular unemployment insurance, and creating a “jobseeker’s allowance.” The proposal would also create a Transition Wages program to help workers who have been displaced by AI disruption pursue education and training for higher-paying jobs.

Senate HELP Chair Cassidy Requests GAO Investigation into Improper Payments in CCDF: On October 19, Senate HELP Committee Chair Bill Cassidy (R-LA), joined by Senators Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) and Jon Husted (R-OH), requested that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) conduct an investigation into fraud risks and improper payments in the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF). In the request, the Senators cite that HHS reported more than $800 million in CCDF overpayments in FY2025, representing approximately 4.5% of payments. The Senators ask GAO to examine how federal and state agencies assess fraud risks, verify family and provider eligibility, ensure providers are paid for services actually delivered, prevent duplicate billing across federal child care programs, and identify additional actions that could strengthen payment integrity. The Senators also request that GAO examine how HHS ensures states accurately estimate their improper payment rates. The request follows House passage in June of H.R. 7726, the “Stop Child Care Scams Act of 2026,” that would expand HHS's authority to address improper payments, including allowing the Secretary to withhold CCDF funding from states with improper payment rates above 5%. Of note, improper payments are not synonymous with fraud and can include unintentional errors or payments for which sufficient documentation is unavailable. See EducationCounsel’s resource Program Integrity in the Child Care and Development Fund: Distinguishing Between and Addressing Fraud and Improper Payments to explain the distinction between fraud and improper payments.

 

House:

House Education and Workforce Ranking Member Scott Releases a Report on Barriers to Graduation: On October 21, House Education and the Workforce Committee Ranking Member Bobby Scott (D-VA) released a report titled, “Unlocking Student Success: Addressing Barriers to College Completion,” examining the challenges that prevent students from completing college degrees. The report notes that approximately 37.6 million working adults ages 18–65 had attended college, but had not earned a degree at the start of the 2023–2024 school year, emphasizing that barriers often extend beyond academic ability to include food insecurity, financial hardship, and inadequate access to essential support services. The report highlights that 23% of college students experienced food insecurity in 2020, while fewer than half of students eligible for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits reported receiving them. The report recommends investing in evidence-based practices that improve graduation rates, including expansion of comprehensive academic advising, emergency financial assistance, and childcare for student parents, as well as calls on federal policymakers to protect and strengthen student support programs as part of any effort to reauthorize the Higher Education Act.

House Education and Workforce Committee Republicans Hold Field Hearing to Highlight the Federal Scholarship Tax Credit and School Choice: On October 22, the House Committee on Education and Workforce held a field hearing titled, “More Choices, Brighter Futures: Expanding Education Freedom,” at Northampton Community College in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, to examine school choice, charter schools, and federal policies intended to expand educational options, including the new Federal Scholarship Tax Credit (FSTC). The FSTC, which was created in the One Big, Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), allows taxpayers to receive a federal tax credit for contributions to Scholarship Granting Organizations that provide scholarships for qualified elementary and secondary education expenses. On October 2, 2026 the U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) published proposed regulations implementing the FSTC (see EducationCounsel’s recent resource Unpacking the Treasury’s Proposed Regulations for the Federal Scholarship Tax Credit for a full review of the proposed Regulations from the Department of Treasury). The Committee heard from four witnesses: Nathan Benefield, chief policy officer at the Commonwealth Foundation; Ilen Perez-Valdes, a Future Leaders Fellow at the American Federation for Children; Susan Spicka, executive director of Education Voters of Pennsylvania; and Eric Paisner, chief legal officer of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools.

In his opening remarks, Chairman Tim Walberg (R-MI) argued that parents should be able to choose the educational setting that best meets their children's needs. He highlighted the new FSTC, scheduled to take effect in 2027. Additionally, he urged Pennsylvania to opt into the FSTC program, so families could benefit from additional scholarship opportunities. As background, Governors must choose to opt their states into the program. Chair Walberg’s remarks also emphasized parental control, school choice growth, and concerns about student achievement. House Education and Workforce Committee Ranking Member Bobby Scott (D-VA) was not present at the hearing. 
 
In her testimony, Ms. Perez-Valdes shared her personal experience with school choice, explaining how a scholarship helped her attend a private school better equipped to accommodate her medical needs and supported her high-school graduation. Mr. Benefield, in his remarks, argued that school choice can be particularly important for students with disabilities, citing Philadelphia's use of private schools when public schools cannot adequately meet students' needs.
 
Only two other members attended the hearing alongside Chair Walberg: Representatives Ryan Mackenzie (R-PA) and Mark Messmer (R-IN). Representative Mackenzie (R-PA) highlighted H.R. 7082, the “FLEX Act,” which would update federal charter-school policy and better align funding with actual enrollment. Representative Messmer (R-IN) questioned Mr. Benefield about the benefits of school choice for students with special needs, prompting discussion of individualized educational options. Republican members used the field hearing to make the case for expanding school choice through scholarships, charter-school reforms, and greater parental control over education. 

 

U.S. Courts:

U.S. Supreme Court Agrees to Take Up Race-Based Challenge to Magnet School Admissions Policy: On October 19, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a challenge to Montgomery County Board of Education’s (MCPS) admissions process for a group of highly-selective public magnet schools in the Maryland school district. The Court indicated it will hear arguments specifically on the question of “whether a plaintiff challenging a facially neutral admissions policy as racially discriminatory must establish that the targeted racial group suffered an aggregate disparate impact relative to its share of the applicant pool.” Two years ago, the Court declined to take up similar cases that upheld K-12 admissions policies in Fairfax County, Virginia, and Boston. This case will be the Court’s first opportunity to revisit the topic of race and admissions since its 2023 higher education decision involving Harvard University and the University of North Carolina.

Parents challenging the policy at issue in Association for Education Fairness v. Montgomery County Board of Education claim that MCPS violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment because it allegedly revised the admissions process with the intent to reduce the number of Asian-American students attending those schools – despite the fact that the revised process is racially neutral on its face (i.e., MCPS does not treat applicants differently on the basis of their race). During the 2021-22 school year, MCPS revised its admissions policy to enter all fifth graders who met a series of threshold criteria (including grades, reading level, and standardized test scores) in a lottery for admission to the magnet programs. The district court dismissed the lawsuit, concluding that the plaintiffs had not shown that MCPS’s policy had disparately impacted Asian-American students, who the judge noted “consistently have occupied a proportionally greater share of students admitted into the magnet program as compared to their representation in the applicant pool.” The court also held that the plaintiffs failed to show that MCPS was motivated by discriminatory intent in changing its admissions policy. The Fourth Circuit upheld that decision on appeal before the plaintiffs sought review by the Supreme Court. Oral arguments on the disparate impact question will likely take place in early 2027, with a decision likely by June 2027.

Court Rules FCC Lacked Authority to Establish E-Rate’s Administrative Entity: On October 15, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) lacked the statutory authority to create the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC), the quasi-independent entity that administers the Universal Service Fund (USF), which includes the E-Rate program subsidizing high-speed internet access for schools and libraries. Because the court concluded that the FCC lacked the authority to establish USAC, it also struck down the USF contribution rate from telecommunications providers for the fourth quarter of 2025 (which was based on USAC projections). The ruling does not invalidate the E-Rate program, nor does it direct USAC to stop processing applications or disbursing funding. However, because the decision calls into question USAC’s underlying authority, it could have broader implications for the future administration and financing of E-Rate and other USF programs. 
 
The FCC could ask the full Fifth Circuit or the Supreme Court to review the decision, and Congress could also step in to specifically authorize USAC within the Government Corporation Control Act of 1945. If the Fifth Circuit’s recent decision takes effect, the FCC would likely need to quickly absorb USAC’s administrative functions, raising questions about whether the Commission (as currently staffed and funded) has the capacity to unilaterally collect billions of dollars in contributions from telecommunications providers and, in turn, administer all of the programs under USAC’s purview, including E-Rate, with fidelity. 

This ruling about USAC adds to a number of developments affecting E-Rate. On June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court ruled in an earlier claim arising from this same lawsuit that the FCC’s funding mechanism was lawful. The Court did not at that time rule on the legality of USAC itself; this is the issue the Fifth Circuit just addressed. 
 
On the regulatory side, the FCC is currently accepting replies to initial public comment on (i) a proposed comprehensive review of the E-Rate program in particular (see EducationCounsel’s August 20, 2026 Alert for more information) and (ii) a separate review of the USF and USAC in general. 

Administration Drops Defense of Public Service Loan Forgiveness Restrictions: On October 21, DOJ asked two federal courts to dismiss the DOJ’s own appeals of lower court rulings vacating USED’s changes to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program. One year ago, USED finalized a rule that would have allowed it to disqualify certain employers from PSLF if the agency determined that those employers engaged in activities with a “substantial illegal purpose,” including activities related to immigration, gender-affirming care, diversity, equity and inclusion, and state law violations. (See EducationCounsel’s November 13, 2025 Alert for full details on the final rule and the March 11, 2026 Alert about President Trump’s executive order about PSLF.) The rule faced immediate legal challenges from states, nonprofit organizations, and labor unions. On June 30, federal courts in Massachusetts and the District of Columbia vacated the rule after concluding that it exceeded the Administration’s authority and raised First Amendment concerns (see EducationCounsel’s July 9, 2026 Alert for initial analysis of the decision). DOJ first appealed both decisions and has now abandoned those appeals.
 
This is not necessarily the end of the Administration’s efforts to narrow employer eligibility for PSLF. The Administration has indicated its intention to promulgate regulations on additional higher education topics, and it is possible that it will choose to reregulate on this issue.

Fourth Circuit Resurrects Fairfax and Arlington Lawsuits Against USED over “High-Risk” Status: On October 15, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit overturned lower court decisions dismissing lawsuits brought by two Virginia school districts—Fairfax County Public Schools and Arlington Public Schools—to challenge their placement by USED in “high-risk” status because of the districts’ policies around gender identity. (See EducationCounsel’s  August 25, 2025 Alert for more information about USED’s actions.) The appellate court held that Fairfax’s and Arlington’s claims should not have been dismissed because they are fundamentally statutory in nature rather than purely contractual claims that must instead be brought before the Court of Federal Claims (as the district court ruled). The core Fraud question raised by Fairfax and Arlington is whether USED can penalize them under Title IX for policies that the districts argue comply with the Fourth Circuit’s precedent, which is binding on school districts in Virginia. This statutory argument, the appellate court noted, distinguishes the dispute from the Supreme Court’s ruling in NIH v. American Public Health Association and other cases that were limited to disagreements about the disbursement of federal funds. The lawsuits will now proceed in the district court.
 

Upcoming Events (Congress & Administration):

  • Wednesday, November 19, from 9:05 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., and Thursday, November 20, from 10:40 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. EST, the National Assessment Governing Board will hold its Committee and Quarterly Board Meetings. For the Federal Register Notice announcing the meeting, see here.

Upcoming Events (Outside Organizations):

  • On Tuesday, November 3 at 11:00 a.m. EST, the National Center on Education and the Economy will hold a discussion titled "Leading Schools for What Comes Next, TALIS (Teaching and Learning International Survey) 2024 Further Results." for more information and to register, see here.
  • On Wednesday, November 4 at 4:15 p.m. EST, the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research will hold a discussion titled "What Will the 2026 Midterm Elections Mean for Education?" For more information and to RSVP, see here.

Publications (Outside Organizations):

  • On October 27, Brookings published a report titled, “Teacher pay in the US is relatively low and trending downward.” Among the findings in the report include that relative to other occupations, American teachers’ pay is the lowest estimated ratio among Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development countries, that retirement and other payroll benefits do not make up for low salaries, and that schools have more money than ever, but they are spending a shrinking share of it on teacher salaries.
  • On October 28, the Fordham Institute published a report titled, “Studying the Southern Surge: How Alabama Beat the Odds in Reading.” The report identifies ways in which other states can replicate the success of Alabama and its students’ literacy gains. Among the findings from the report include that evidence-based reading instruction begins with state education agencies that understand the science of reading, that state leaders should adopt and stand by a multifaceted strategy for implementation, and that effective coaching requires defined roles, support, and steady funding. 
  • On October 28, Bellwether released a report titled, “Screens Off, Questions On: An Analysis of K-12 Screen Time and AI Bans.” The report contains several key questions for state policymakers and district leaders to keep in mind as they consider how technology is used in schools. Among these key questions are, whether the regulations align with instructional strategy and support student safety and well-being, what role screen time and AI are currently playing in schools, and what replaces classroom technologies that are removed and how will one know if the new approach be better?
View More E-Updates

These materials have been prepared for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Internet subscribers and online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.