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 primarily during the time period of October 2, 2026, through October 15, 2026.

Highlights:

• On October 4, President Trump announced the creation of the Super Intelligence Force (SIF) Task Force, which will be responsible for reporting on the risks and opportunities of AI and the responsibilities of the federal government within 120 days of its creation.
• During this time period, congressional members weighed in on a series of proposed regulations, including those to change Head Start Program Performance Standards, reform the E-Rate program, and implement the new Federal Scholarship Tax Credit (FSTC).
• On October 5, the U.S. Supreme Court officially kicked off its 2026-2027 term, which will include the consideration of education-related cases related to whether Colorado may require religious preschool providers participating in the state’s universal preschool program to comply with the state’s nondiscrimination requirements and whether there is a private right of action for sex discrimination in employment under Title IX. Additionally, the Supreme Court agreed on October 19 to hear a case over admission standards for middle school magnet programs in Maryland’s Montgomery County Public Schools.

Administration

 
White House:

President Trump Announces Creation of Super Intelligence Task Force and Members: On October 4, President Trump announced the creation of the Super Intelligence Force (SIF), super intelligence (SI) being the language used by federal agencies to refer to Artificial Intelligence (AI) as of President Trump’s recent Executive Order. The task force will be led by Director of National Intelligence Jay Clayton, who the administration has named as “AI Czar.” The task force will include three vice chairs:  Emil Michael, who will coordinate with AI companies; Scott Kupor, who will coordinate with critical infrastructure providers and other industry stakeholders; and Andrew Ferguson, who will oversee consumer interests and advocate groups in areas such as faith, children, privacy, and freedom of speech. Additional members of the group include Vice President JD Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, as well as external partners such as David Sacks and former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, among others. Along with coordinating the Federal Government's engagement with different stakeholders in the realm of AI, the task force will also be responsible for reporting on the risks and opportunities of AI and the responsibilities of the federal government, within 120 days of its creation. The task force will review current warning systems of government hacks and other cyber threats, examine current laws and discuss possible Congressional actions, as well as develop plans to respond to AI threats to society, while “preventing overregulation and regulatory capture that would stifle innovation and competition.” 
 
In an interview with Politico Vice Chair Scott Kupor stated that the task force would work closely with DOJ and other law enforcement agencies to hold AI companies to safety expectations, such as auditing the pledges made through recent AI accords or ensuring the government has the resources needed to respond to potential issues with AI models.
 
White House Calls for Expanding STEM Talent Development and AI-Driven Research to Strengthen U.S. Innovation Leadership at New Golden Age Summit: On October 8, the White House announced $6 billion in investments in science initiatives across federal government agencies, industry, institutions of higher education, and philanthropy, in what it called the “most ambitious set of science initiatives in decades.” Announced during a Science: A New Golden Age Summit, an Administration-led event to highlight opportunities for federal research agencies and partners to lead scientific discovery in the United States, the investments are intended to support scientists harnessing AI-driven scientific revolution, STEM students and early-career scientists, national scientific missions, and new scientific institutions. 
 
Specific investments and initiatives, as described by White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Director Michael Kratsios during remarks at the summit, include: $2.4 billion for AI-driven science tools and compute credits with support from 11 industry partners including NVIDIA, AMD, OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and six other companies; investments in scientific computing at infrastructure hubs housed at 14 universities across 10 states; and $100 million in AI to increase scientific productivity and support innovative approaches to research. Additionally, the Administration plans to support students pursuing STEM education and training through initiatives such as the NSF Young Scholars Program, funded primarily by philanthropy, to support students in grades 3-12 with demonstrated ability in math; a high school fellowship to expose students to hands-on research at Department of Energy (DOE) National Laboratories; a $100 million PhD fellowship initiative for students interested in AI and other DOE- and industry-connected research; and an accelerated bachelor’s to PhD program for scientific doctoral students. Other announced investments will focus on developing national scientific missions (similar, as the Administration describes, to the Manhattan Project and the Apollo Program) and building new scientific infrastructures and initiatives to tackle and evaluate specific scientific and technical challenges. 

U.S. Department of Education:

USED Releases First Look at 2023-2024 Civil Rights Data Collection: After several months’ delay, USED released the raw data for the school year 2023-2024 Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC), as well as recently published the First Look Report that typically accompanies the data release and that highlights key trends for the public. As background, the CRDC is a mandatory survey of all public school districts and schools in the 50 states, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico. The CRDC gathers district- and school-level information about student access to educational programs, activities, resources, and school climate factors, from school districts serving students in preschool through grade 12.
 
The report notes that access to mathematics, science, and computer science courses varies across the approximately 27,200 public high schools with 75% offering chemistry, 67% offering advanced
mathematics, 59% offering physics, 51% offering computer science, and 45% offering calculus, while over 80% of high schools offered Algebra I, Algebra II, geometry, and biology. Additionally, about 3.1 million public high school students were enrolled in at least one AP course, which was about 18% of public high school enrollment.
 
An analysis of the First Look Report by NPR also highlighted that, “Some 1.5 million children were enrolled in public preschool programs — a 12% jump from the 2021-[20]22 school year, but still slightly lower than 2019.” Similarly, the population of students with disabilities grew. According to NPR, “While the previous CRDC showed 17% of students had disabilities, the newest data show they made up 19% of all students enrolled in public schools.” At the same time the analysis found, “K-12 enrollment fell almost 1% compared with the 2021-[20]22 school year.” Maithreyi Gopalan of the University of Oregon, who helps lead the research and policy group AdvancED Equity, explained in the NPR article that “the decrease is consistent with other data and could have to do with declining birthrates and an increase in private school and homeschooled students in some states.”
 
Of note, USED suppressed data collected on nonbinary students in the First Look Report, in line with its decision for the forthcoming 2025-2026 school year collection to remove questions about nonbinary students and references to gender identity. (See EducationCounsel’s August 5, 2025 Alert for more information on these changes.)
 
USED announces new awards for federal programs to support higher education access and completion: On October 6, USED announced the release of $39 million in additional federal funding for TRIO college-access programs, bringing total awards for the Talent Search and Educational Opportunity Centers (EOC) programs to more than $225 million for fiscal year (FY) 2026. The latest funding includes nearly $32 million for 52 new Talent Search grantees, which help students from disadvantaged backgrounds prepare for and pursue higher education, and $7 million for 22 new EOC grantees, which help adults access college opportunities.
 
The additional awards provide continued support for colleges, universities, and other organizations working to expand educational access. According to Inside Higher Education, advocates had been concerned that the Trump Administration would direct Talent Search funding to states, as Education Secretary McMahon indicated in June, rather than directly to colleges and universities - and EOC grants to workforce programs administered by the Department of Labor, rather than to helping adults complete their GED or re-entering college. 

U.S. Department of Justice:

DOJ and USED Disavow Past Investigations of Parents’ Conduct Against School Boards: On October 5, DOJ’s Weaponization Working Group issued a report examining a October 4, 2021 memorandum and task force launched under the Biden Administration regarding “harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff.” Although the original memo (since rescinded by the Trump Administration) distinguished between protected and unprotected speech, the Working Group’s new report concluded that efforts undertaken by the Biden Administration impermissibly “chilled the exercise of parental and free speech rights.” 
 
In the wake of the Working Group’s findings, DOJ announced that it will review investigations initiated under the original memo and offer formal apologies, award $1.5 million to the National Association of School Resource Officers for training and technical assistance around parents’ rights, and prioritize funding for resources for educators and staff on the same topic. Additionally, USED issued a letter to state Attorneys General urging them to implement the Department’s interpretation of Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) as well as the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA). (See EducationCounsel’s September 3 Alert for analysis of the Student Privacy Policy Office’s recent Dear Colleague Letter on this topic.)

U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS):

DHS Proposes New Fees for International Student Work Program: On October 7, DHS announced a proposed rule that would require colleges and universities to pay a $70,000 fee for each international student seeking an optional practical training (OPT) work authorization and a $30,000 fee for any OPT extensions. This is a substantial increase from the current application fee of about $500 typically paid by students. Public comments can be submitted until November 9 on the proposed rule. This proposal is part of the Administration’s broader efforts to limit international student enrollment. Specifically, DHS recently sought to implement a rule to limit the duration of international student visas (which was vacated by a federal court on September 14) and, in 2025, the State Department attempted to pause approvals for new student visas. (See EducationCounsel’s September 16 Alert for more information about the federal court vacating the DHS rule to limit the duration of international student visas and our June 2, 2025 Alert for information about the State Department’s attempt last year to pause approvals for new student visas.)

Congress:

Bicameral Democratic Members Oppose Proposed E-Rate Reform Efforts, while Key Senate Republican Raises Concern with E-Rate Complexity: As background, Federal Communications Commissions (FCC) Chair Brendan Carr announced earlier this year a review of the federal E-Rate program, asserting that “excessive screen time” and “poor educational outcomes” necessitated a thorough review of the program. E-Rate, funded through the Universal Service Fund, provides discounts for internet access and connections to eligible schools and libraries. Subsequently, on August 14, the FCC announced a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) and further notice of proposed rulemaking (FNPRM) to undertake the comprehensive review of the federal E-Rate program that Chairman Carr previewed. (See EducationCounsel’s August 20 Alert for more information.)
 
Rather than propose new legally binding rules, the FCC structured the NPRM around several questions it was seeking responses to, including questions about (i) whether the FCC’s progress in ensuring affordable access to high-speed broadband to and within schools and libraries justifies scaling back or repurposing the program and its dedicated funding, (ii) what measures the FCC can take through administrative and eligibility determination levers to better protect children and limit the use of screens in schools, and (iii) whether the FCC’s current interpretation of the Children’s Internet Protection Act is the best reading of the statute. The FNPRM also proposed specific changes to the E-Rate program, such as increasing oversight of external consultants working with eligible entities and streamlining program administration, including competitive bidding requirements. Comments on both the NPRM and FNPRM were due on October 13.
 
In response to the proposed regulations, Senator Edward Markey (D-MA), who is a member of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee and author of the E-Rate program, along with Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Representatives Doris Matsui (D-CA), Rob Menendez (D-NJ), and Grace Meng (D-NY), led comments from nearly the entire Senate Democratic Caucus (46 Senators total) and more than 60 members of the House Democratic Caucus (65 Representatives total) in urging FCC Chair Carr to withdraw the Commission’s proposal to eliminate or limit the E-Rate program. In the letter, the Democratic members emphasized that “cutting E-Rate would narrow th[e] talent pipeline,” and expressed, “Maintaining connectivity in every school and library is therefore an investment in America’s technological leadership, economic competitiveness, and national security.” The Democratic members further noted, “The FCC’s effort to justify cutting or eliminating E-Rate under the guise of protecting children online does not withstand scrutiny.” They went on to say, “We strongly support measures to protect children online and address concerns around excessive screen time. But cutting E-Rate is not a child safety measure.”
 
Separately, Republican Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation (Commerce) Committee Chair Ted Cruz (R-TX) submitted in response to the proposed regulations a report outlining concerns with the “consultant ecosystem” that he asserts has developed due to the complexity of the E-Rate program (See more below).
 
While public comments were due on October 13, the public may now post replies to others’ comments through November 12, as part of an open reply comment period.
 
Bicameral Democratic Members Object to Reprogramming of Minority-Serving Institutions Funding: On October 14, Senator Mazie K. Hirono (D-HI) led Democratic members, including Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee Ranking Member Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Patty Murray (D-WA), Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies (LHHS) Appropriations Subcommittee Ranking Member Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dick Durbin (D-IL), and Senators Ben Ray Luján (D-NM) and Alex Padilla (D-CA), alongside Congressional Tri-Caucus Chairs Grace Meng (D-NY), Adriano Espaillat (D-NY), and Yvette Clarke (D-NY), in objecting to USED’s recent action canceling mandatory funding for Minority-Serving Institutions and instead redirecting those funds to Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCUs). (See EducatinCounsel’s October 1 Alert for more information.)
 
In their letter to USED Secretary Linda McMahon, the Democratic members emphasized that the mandatory funding provided through the FUTURE Act, “cannot be reallocated for other purposes or programs without explicit authorization from Congress,” before stating, “[US]ED does not have the unilateral authority to reallocate these funds.” The Democratic members went on to say, “[US]ED must immediately remedy these illegal actions and restore the funds that were illegally taken away from [Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs), Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions (AANAPISIs), Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions (ANNHSIs), Native American-Serving Non-Tribal Institutions (NASNTIs), and Predominantly Black Institutions (PBIs).” Additionally, the Democratic members expressed that while funding for HBCUs and TCUs is important, “Increases in funding for HBCUs and TCCUs should not come at the expense of other critical institutions of higher education.”
 
Democratic Committee Leaders Challenge U.S. Department of Treasury’s Proposed Federal Scholarship Tax Credit (FSTC) Regulations: On October 6, House Ways and Means Committee Ranking Member Richard Neal (D-MA) and Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-OR) sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent objecting to a key provision in Treasury’s proposed Federal Scholarship Tax Credit (FSTC) proposed regulations and temporary regulations. 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. Treasury’s proposed FSTC regulations, released on October 1, are currently open for public comment through December 1. (See EducationCounsel’s Deep Dive: Unpacking Treasury’s Proposed Regulations for the Federal Scholarship Tax Credit for more information.)
 
In their letter, House Ways and Means Committee Ranking Member Neal and Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Wyden argue that Treasury’s interpretation would allow married couples filing jointly to effectively claim $3,400 (instead of $1,700) or twice the amount of tax credits authorized under the statute, potentially expanding the size and cost of the program beyond what Congress initially intended. They state that this interpretation is inconsistent with longstanding tax law practice and could increase the federal deficit. The letter requests additional information from Treasury regarding the legal basis for its interpretation and its broader implications for tax administration. Further, the Democratic members assert in their press release on the letter that Treasury’s proposed regulations are a “blatant attempt to circumvent the clear rules established by Congress to funnel even more taxpayer funds away from public education and use it to subsidize the private school education of children from wealthy families.”
 
190 Bicameral Democratic Members Oppose Proposed Head Start Rule: Earlier this year, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced a proposed rule to significantly scale back federal Head Start Program Performance Standards (HSPPS). (See EducationCounsel’s Deep Dive: Unpacking the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Overhaul the Head Start Program Performance Standards for more information.) The public comment period closed on October 6, and HHS is now reviewing comments before issuing a final rule. In response to the proposal rule, 190 Democratic members, led by House Education and Workforce Committee Ranking Member Bobby Scott (D-VA), House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), and Senate Health Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee Ranking Member Bernie Sanders (I-VT), submitted comments asking the Department to withdraw the proposal. In the letter, the Democratic members argue that the rule would effectively dismantle core components of Head Start by eliminating more than 90% of existing federal standards governing program quality, health and safety protections, staff qualifications, classroom ratios, services for children with disabilities and dual language learners, and comprehensive health supports. The Democratic members also raised concerns that the proposal could reduce access to services for some currently eligible children and shorten program operating hours for families who rely on Head Start for care and early learning services.

Senate:

Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee Chair Cruz Releases E-Rate Report: On October 13, Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation (Commerce) Committee Chair Ted Cruz (R-TX) released a report titled, “The Cost of Connection: E-Rate’s Hidden Consultant Ecosystem.” The report estimates that consultants collect between $200 million and $400 million annually to assist applicants in obtaining program support and are associated with applications for approximately 82% of E-Rate funding. The report includes three key findings: first, that the highly technical and complicated nature of E-Rate program navigation, ranging from front-end bidding to back-end compliance, incentivizes a reliance on consultant support. Second, the report finds that consultant pricing is inconsistent across jurisdictions and determined arbitrarily. Third, the report finds that the subsidy structure of E-Rate disincentivizes cost control measures, potentially artificially driving up internet service costs. The report cites instances of E-Rate fraud and abuse perpetrated by vendors and consultants between 2004 and 2026, but clarifies that the examples described are not representative of the program as a whole. 
 
In the report’s conclusion, Commerce Committee staff provide four recommended changes to E-Rate to modernize the program and reduce recipients’ reliance on consultants, including (1) simplifying program rules to reduce the reliance on consultants, (2) requiring public disclosure of consultant compensation associated with E-Rate, (3) stopping the further expansion of E-Rate (including pilot programs) until the program’s vulnerabilities are addressed, and (4) reducing the likelihood of conflicts of interest in E-Rate administration by reforming the Universal Service Administrative Commission’s Board of Directors. In a press release announcing the report’s release, Chair Cruz points to the need to prevent consultants from “skimming” E-Rate funding and modernizing the program to ensure benefits reach those who need them. 
 
The report comes amid the FCC’s open reply comment window for its proposed regulations conducting a comprehensive review of the E-Rate program. Part of the FCC’s proposed rule aims to curtail and/or disincentivize the ability of consultants to directly benefit from E-Rate funds by requiring the annual certification and disclosure on the use of consultants by E-Rate applicants and service providers, creating a database for consultants participating or seeking to participate in E-Rate to register their participation, proposing to restrict applicants and service providers from paying consultants based on a percentage of the E-Rate contract or funding application amount, and clarifying the FCC’s rules regarding the type of consultant-related documents required to show continued compliance with E-Rate program rules. 
 
Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee Ranking Member Cantwell Outlines Comprehensive Governance Framework for Safe and Secure Frontier AI: On October 7, Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation (Commerce) Committee Ranking Member Maria Cantwell (D-WA) released a comprehensive, six-part AI governance, safety, and accountability framework that she indicated must drive legislative and executive actions to regulate AI and address its potential harms. The six principles comprising the framework are: Clear, Enforceable Federal Safety Standards for Frontier AI Development and Deployment; Continuous Testing, Reviewing and Auditing to Verify Standards are Met; Transparency and Accountability Through Disclosure, Oversight and Consequences; Public Private Partnerships to Benefit the Public Good; Protections for Children, Support for Workers and Human Oversight of Consequential AI; and U.S. Led Global Cooperation in Adopting and Upholding Common AI Safety and Security Standards. 
 
On safety, the framework emphasizes the need for National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)-developed standards to mitigate against catastrophic risks and harms from frontier AI models and systems, including AI-enabled cyberattacks; chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear threats; potential for loss of human control; and AI agents escaping closed testing environments. The framework calls for federal standards to be updated as the technology evolves. To promote safety, the framework also incorporates continual review, constant oversight, and ongoing accountability for AI developers. Notably, the framework stresses the need for public-private partnerships – such as between government, industry, and universities – to expand access to AI tools for researchers working on issues of national interest. Additionally, the framework calls for safety protocols for children using AI tools to protect against addiction, harmful exploitation, and data harvesting. To support widely realized benefits from the technology, the framework calls for AI companies to help fund apprenticeships, education, and other workforce training programs to promote economic mobility and AI skills development for Americans. 
 
Ranking Member Cantwell’s expansive framework is markedly different from that of several of her colleagues in the Senate, including Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) and Commerce Committee Chair Ted Cruz (R-TX), both of whom have indicated a “lighter touch” approach to regulating AI. The set of policies and priorities encompassed by the framework is a likely indication of what Senator Cantwell may pursue on AI regulation if she becomes Chair of the Commerce Committee in the 120th Congress.
 
Senate Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Guthrie and Co-Chair of Bipartisan House AI Task Force Lieu Discuss AI Landscape and American Workforce and Innovation: On October 7, House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Brett Guthrie (R-KY) and Co-Chair of the Bipartisan House AI Task Force Ted Lieu (D-CA) participated in a technology summit in hosted by Punchbowl News. The summit, which focused on federal AI policy, touched on several key topics, including the roles of federal and state government in regulating AI, the consequences of a slowdown in frontier model development for both the United States and other nations around the globe (including China), the need for and extent of federally-mandated guardrails, and infrastructure and data centers and the factors driving political and public concerns around capital expenditures on both. Both representatives discussed prospects for a major AI package next Congress, with Representative Lieu noting that a single, sweeping AI bill passing is unlikely even next Congress, but smaller bills in discrete areas are possible. Representative Guthrie noted that he thinks some version of the regulatory framework for how the United States could govern artificial intelligence proposed by Representatives Greg Obernolte (R-CA) and Lori Trahan (D-MA) is possible, but that it would take compromise with his House Energy and Commerce Committee Democratic counterpart, Ranking Member Frank Pallone (D-NJ). 
 
Representative Lieu remarked that states have taken the lead on AI regulation given the federal vacuum on regulation, with both speakers agreeing that at the very least, the federal government should enact some form of a “kill switch” to rein in models that pose grave safety risks. Representative Guthrie also cautioned though against overregulation because of the potential to cede AI leadership to China, echoing the “light touch” view and accompanying concern shared by some of his Republican colleagues. 
 
Senate Democratic Appropriations Committee Leaders Raise Concerns with USED’s Expanded Use of “Frontloading” Grants: On October 13, Senate Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Patty Murray (D-WA) and Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee Ranking Member Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) sent a letter to USED Secretary Linda McMahon expressing concerns with the Department’s “extensive “frontloading” of grants,” or the practice of “paying out many years of a multi-year grant in one lump sum instead of funding a larger number of grants right now.” In the letter, the key Democratic Appropriators assert that, “the Department is intentionally and sharply limiting the number of new grants it will award, by concentrating funds into fewer grants and withholding significant portions of appropriated resources for use in future budget periods.” The Democratic members further stated this policy “blatantly disregards congressional directives and withholds urgently needed federal resources.”
 
Specifically, the Senators assert that the Department is withholding approximately $630 million in appropriated resources across approximately 35 grant programs. They state that had the Department funded these grants on annual basis rather than as multi-year grants as has been done historically that, “the Department could have awarded well over 1,000 additional grants this year, supporting
everything from evidence-based student literacy programs, to improving student mental health, to recruiting and preparing high-quality teachers, to supporting additional education research and
to helping first-generation students succeed in college.” Explicitly named examples of programs in the letter impacted by this policy include the Innovative Approaches to Literacy (IAL) program, the Child Care Access Means Parents in School Program (CCAMPIS), the Supporting Effective Educator Development program, the Teacher Quality Partnership (TQP) program, and the Augustus Hawkins Centers of Excellence Program, among others. The letter further notes that the Department recently frontloaded existing research grants under the Institute of Education Sciences (IES).

U.S. Courts:

U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Education Cases in Fall Term: During its fall term, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider the following education-related cases: 
 

• On November 3, the Court will hear arguments in St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy, a case that raises the question of whether Colorado may require religious preschool providers participating in the state’s universal preschool program to comply with the state’s nondiscrimination requirements. Some providers filed the lawsuit, arguing that Colorado was violating their First Amendment rights by requiring them to abide by the state’s prohibition on discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. (The appeals court ruled against the providers.)
• On November 30, the Court will hear arguments in Thomas Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, a case that raises the question whether there is a private right of action for sex discrimination in employment under Title IX. (The appeals court ruled against the employees.) 

 
Additionally, the Court agreed on October 19 to hear a case over admission standards for middle school magnet programs in Maryland’s Montgomery County Public Schools. As the year progresses, the Court might also agree to review other education-related cases and/or review lower courts’ temporary rulings on the Court’s “emergency” docket. Some of the issues raised by cases that the Court has been asked to review include state laws requiring that public schools post the Ten Commandments in each classroom and whether Title IX prohibits states from allowing transgender athletes to compete on sports teams that align with their gender identity.
 
Lawsuits Challenge Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Use of Pocket Rescissions: Several lawsuits were filed challenging the September 25 announcement by OMB that it was using a “pocket rescission” to cancel $810 million in previously appropriated funding for FY2026 that expired on September 30 before Congress could respond to the Administration’s action. (See EducationCounsel’s October 1 Alert for more information.) As background, the affected funds primarily included U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) funding for programs serving undocumented immigrants and unaccompanied children, as well as those under the Office of Minority Health. Approximately $95 million in USED programs were also canceled, including $70 million for International and Foreign Language Education (of the $85 million appropriated by Congress) and $25 million (of $52 million appropriated by Congress) from the Special Programs for Migrant Students programs, which include the High School Equivalency (HEP) and College Assistance Migrant (CAMP) programs.
 
The suits affecting education include a challenge by seven states (CA, ME, MD, MI, NM, NV, OR) to the entire rescission package, and an action filed by the National HEP-CAMP Association to object to the cancellation of $25 million in education funding for the HEP and CAMP programs, which help students from migrant families access and succeed in postsecondary education.
 
Federal Court Temporarily Blocks Disclosure of Foreign University Donors: On October 1, a federal district court in Washington, D.C., issued a temporary restraining order preventing USED from publicly releasing the identities of foreign donors to colleges and universities reported under Section 117 of the Higher Education Act. The Association of American Universities (AAU) brought this lawsuit to challenge USED’s June 2026 decision to publish donor names after previously confirming to institutions that they would not be identifying donor information. The judge concluded that AAU was likely to succeed on claims that the policy change may violate the Administrative Procedure Act and that disclosure could cause irreparable harm to donors and institutions.     
 
DOJ Announces New Lawsuit Against a University Providing In-State Tuition to Undocumented Students, while a Federal District Court Dismisses DOJ’s Lawsuit Against Virginia: As highlighted in EducationCounsel’s September 16 Alert, DOJ announced it had filed lawsuits against all states with laws that provide undocumented students with in-state tuition rates. On October 1, DOJ filed a new lawsuit against an individual university that provides undocumented students with in-state tuition rates, even though its state does not have a policy to that effect. DOJ’s lawsuit against the University of Delaware alleges that the university's residency-based tuition policy conflicts with federal immigration law by allowing some undocumented students to receive reduced in-state tuition rates, while denying the same benefit to out-of-state U.S. citizens. 
 
Relatedly, on October 5, a federal district court dismissed DOJ’s challenge to Virginia laws, concluding that they do not violate federal law. Virginia joins Minnesota as the two states to win against the DOJ on this issue thus far. 
 
 
Upcoming Events (Congress & Administration):

• On October 23 at 10:00 a.m. ET, the House Education and Workforce Committee holds a field hearing titled “More Choices, Brighter Futures: Expanding Education Freedom." This hearing will take place at Northampton Community College in Bethlehem, PA. For more information, see here.

 
 
Upcoming Events (Outside Organizations):

• On October 21 at 1:00 p.m. ET, The Chronicle of Higher Education will host a virtual edition of “Daily Briefing Live: The Latest in Higher Ed.” The webinar will provide updates and analysis on the latest developments affecting colleges and universities, and then dive into the midterms, exploring potential election outcomes and what they could mean for higher-ed policy. This is part of a 3-session briefing series. More information is available here.
• On October 22 at 10:00 a.m. ET, the Council for Higher Education Accreditation will hold a virtual discussion on "Quality Assurance in a Changing Global Higher Education Landscape: Balancing Accountability, Improvement, and Local Context." Speakers include Nadia Badrawi, honorary president of the Arab Network for Quality Assurance in Higher Education; Maria Toyoda, president and CEO of the WASC Senior College and University Commission; Stamenka Uvalic-Trumbic, international higher education expert; Jamil Salmi, global tertiary education expert; and Stephen Hundley, founding executive director of the Indiana University Indianapolis Center for Leading Improvements in Higher Education. Panelists will discuss how quality assurance systems can balance public accountability, continuous improvement, institutional autonomy, and innovation while remaining responsive to national, institutional, and cultural contexts. More information and registration can be found here.

 
 
Publications (Outside Organizations):

• On September 28, the National Parents Union released polling results titled, “Where parents actually stand on AI.” Among the findings in the report include that only 1% of parents want zero screen time for learning, that 85% want AI safety taught, that 86% want tech companies banned from harvesting kids’ data, and 78% want k-2 screens limited but not banned.
• On October 7, New America published a report titled, “Sealing the Trapdoors: The State Policies That Matter for Equitable K-12 School Funding.” The report serves as a guide for policymakers and advocates covering critical policy factors that influence the equity of school funding in a state, beyond appropriations for education or funding formulas. The report highlights several ways in which well-intentioned policies might contribute to ‘equity trapdoors,’ such as how funding districts with small enrollment to address rural communities’ diseconomies of scale, can reward splinter districts for remaining separate from larger more diverse neighborhoods.