The Academic Advisor - Education Law Insights, Issue 6, August 2025

 

August 8, 2025

Welcome

Welcome to our sixth issue of The Academic Advisor for 2025.

In this edition, we cover the following topics of interest for schools, institutions of higher education, and other education-focused organizations:

  • How the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) may affect a shift toward private education;
  • Other effects of OBBBA on higher education and recent updates to the 90/10 Rule;
  • How artificial intelligence is encroaching in all aspects of higher education;
  • What comes next for borrowers after dissolution of the SAVE plan;
  • The impact of decreased funding and staffing for the U.S. Department of Education (ED) and its Office of Civil Rights;
  • A chance for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule on the gender identity in athletics debate;
  • What growth of the cybersecurity market signals for educational institutions; and
  • The status of DEI programs in North Carolina.

Yesterday, the Trump administration also announced that colleges will be required to submit new data to the National Center for Education Statistics proving they do not consider race in admissions under a new policy. We will address this topic in detail in our next edition. In the interim, additional information is available via this news article link.

As our Summer Associates return to law school, we also want to thank them for their valuable contributions to The Academic Advisor over the past few months.

As always, thank you for reading.


How a ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ Provision could Accelerate a Shift Toward Private Education

“President Trump’s big policy act on tax cuts, spending cuts and immigration also has a number of other key provisions that are getting less attention but include big changes.”

Why this is important: On July 4, 2025, President Donald Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) into law. OBBBA includes an extension of the tax rates that President Trump signed into law during his first term, an increase in the child tax credit, an increase to the debt ceiling, and significant cuts to Medicaid, among other financial reforms. However, one of the lesser mentioned OBBBA provisions involves a dollar-for-dollar tax credit of up to $1,700 for individuals who donate to a nonprofit organization that offers education scholarships. These scholarships primarily assist students with tuition for private or religious education.

As more states have made a push for private over public education, the scholarship funds that these organizations will need on hand will also increase. As highlighted by this PBS News Hour transcript, in an interview with Laura Meckler of the Washington Post, she said that instead of relying on a few large donations, “[organizations] are going to have to get a lot of donations from a lot of donors in order to raise a substantial amount of money…” This tax credit, which predominantly benefits private schools, is another step in the Trump administration’s efforts to minimize the government’s activity in education. In March, President Trump signed an executive order to take steps to close the U.S. Department of Education (ED). In July, the Supreme Court granted a request from the Trump administration to lift an injunction that blocked layoffs at ED.

After the One Big Beautiful Bill passed both chambers of Congress, Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana said in a statement, “Parents should decide where their kids go to school. This bill helps them do that.” While Congress and the Trump administration are on board with the tax credit, many public education advocates are against it. In a statement, Becky Pringle, President of the National Education Association, called the tax credit “a moral disgrace[,]” adding that “Trump and congressional Republicans [had] undermined our public schools and every student in them.” It is unclear how much the tax credit will cost the federal government at this time. However, the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation estimates the tax credit could result in nearly $26 billion in lost revenue over the next decade. --- Isaiah C. Robinson


How does the Final Reconciliation Bill Impact Higher Ed?

“While some provisions take effect immediately, others—including major changes to federal student aid—will roll out over the next year.”

Why this is important: In an effort to distill the sweeping impact of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) on students and institutions of higher education, the American Council on Education (ACE) has provided range of resources, including a summary of key tax and educational provisions and a podcast that breaks down its effect on student loans, accountability rules, and endowment taxes and provides fiscal year 2026 projections relating to federal funding and accreditation. As highlighted by ACE, notable terms and time frames include: new borrowing limits, the cessation of Grad PLUS, a $65,000 cumulative cap on Parent PLUS, and new repayment plan options that take effect in July 2026; endowment tax changes beginning on or after January 1, 2026; and a new earnings test applicable to all degree programs, which affects eligibility for federal student loans.

Amidst the flurry surrounding OBBBA, the Trump administration also recently implemented a policy change impacting Title IV regulations that are commonly known as the “90/10 Rule.” The 90/10 Rule, codified in Section 487 of the Higher Education Act, requires that at least ten percent of for-profit institutions’ revenue derive from nonfederal sources in order to maintain eligibility for participation in Title IV federal student aid programs. Under the new interpretive rule published by the U.S. Department of Education on July 7, 2025, for-profit colleges may now count proceeds from distance education programs (online courses) that are ineligible for federal aid toward their 90/10 calculation, provided the program meets certain statutory criteria. While proponents laud the relief that this policy change provides proprietary institutions, particularly those with significant online education programs, opponents contest the process by which the change was effectuated without formal rule-making.

Ultimately, as OBBBA and the new interpretation of the 90/10 Rule evidence, changes to education, including how schools are funded, taxed, and held accountable for their graduates’ financial security, remain a top priority for the Trump administration. --- Erin Jones Adams


‘It’s Just Bots Talking to Bots’: AI is Running Rampant on College Campuses as Students and Professors Alike Lean on the Tech

“AI use is continuing to cause trouble on college campuses, but this time it’s professors who are in the firing line.”

Why this is important: AI is increasingly reshaping higher education in profound ways, as seen in this recent Fortune article highlighting how professors, not just students, are immersed in generative AI platforms like ChatGPT. Faculty report that using AI for lesson preparations and grading has become pervasive, shifting expectations and workflows across campuses. Meanwhile, institutions are moving away from bans toward integrating AI into systems, such as the OpenAI partnership with Canvas LMS, which supports assignment design, personalized learning experiences, and streamlined administrative tasks while keeping educators in control.

This rapid evolution in higher education signals new opportunities and risks for ed‑tech developers, infrastructure planners, and compliance teams. Expect the industry to experience expanding demand for AI-driven educational platforms, digital compliance frameworks, and assistive tools that support accessibility. At the same time, rising concerns about academic integrity, data privacy, and equity of access have led universities to reconsider assessment models, like oral exams and process‑oriented assignments, to maintain critical thinking outcomes. Industry stakeholders should be prepared to advise on policy development, licensing, and AI governance, as institutions seek partners who can help them navigate the ethical, technological, and legal dimensions of AI integration in education. --- Addison Gills, Summer Associate


Student Loan Borrowers May be Left with ‘No Affordable Options’ Under Trump Plan Changes, Advocate Says

“The SAVE, or Saving on a Valuable Education, plan, touted by the Biden administration as the most affordable repayment program ever, is now defunct”

Why this is important: Among other changes, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act has introduced sweeping changes to the federal student loan repayment system that place an enormous burden on borrowers. The Act phased out several repayment plans introduced by the Biden administration, including the Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE) plan, considered to be the most affordable repayment program ever to be introduced by an American president. With these changes, many borrowers will be at a heightened risk of default, according to Nancy Nierman, Assistant Director of the Education Debt Consumer Alliance Program.

On July 9, 2025, the U.S. Department of Education announced that the SAVE plan’s interest-free payment pause would elapse on August 1, and that borrowers should “quickly transition to a legally compliant repayment plan.” That transition is expected to put a great deal of financial stress on borrowers, in addition to limiting what repayment options are available. While existing borrowers will continue to have access to other repayment plans, new borrowers after July 1, 2026, will have only two options to choose from: the standard repayment plan with fixed payments or the “Repayment Assistance Plan” (RAP), which is single-income based.

To demonstrate the significance of the changes in store, Preston Cooper from the American Enterprise Institute compared what a borrower would pay under RAP and SAVE. According to Cooper, a borrower with an $80,000 income would have had a monthly bill of $179 under the now-defunct SAVE plan. Under RAP, the same borrower’s monthly bill would skyrocket to $533. This almost 300 percent increase will not only have a significant effect on borrowers’ bottom line each month, but could also limit access to higher education for future college students who require student loans to get through school. --- Gabriel P. Papadopoulos, Summer Associate


Cybersecurity in Higher Education: A Critical Investment Opportunity in an Era of Rising Threats

“Universities manage hundreds of domains, many outdated or unmaintained, creating entry points for hackers.”

Why this is important: Higher education institutions continue to be prime targets of cyberattack groups. Columbia University was a recent victim of a cyberattack that resulted in a class action lawsuit and reputational harm. One reason that educational institutions are targets of cyberattacks is due to the volume of valuable data they maintain. Student information, research intellectual property, and financial records are all valuable for a cyber attacker to possess. Other reasons cyber attackers focus on educational institutions include schools’ use of outdated technology and the complexity universities face in managing many different domains, which create points of weakness in data protection. The vast amount of data and domains give cyber attackers multiple entry points for access.

The increase in cyberattacks, especially those against higher education institutions, has created opportunities in the cybersecurity market. As this article highlights, in 2024 alone, ransomware attacks against educational organizations increased by 75 percent year-over-year, and these breaches cost organizations dearly, with average costs reaching $2.8 million (including administrative downtime and ransom payments) in 2024. As a result, the following segments of the cybersecurity market have caught investors’ attention: endpoint security, identity and access management, encryption and data protection, and AI-powered solutions. There are plenty of tech-based companies working on these offerings. AI technology can monitor organizational data and detect attacks in an expeditated manner; meanwhile, companies that identify weak spots and vulnerabilities in organizational security are also experiencing growth.

Universities must invest in their own cybersecurity and take the steps necessary to avoid becoming part of these statistics. A critical problem some educational organizations face is a lack of funds to invest in these protections due to budget constraints, and in response, some states like New York and California have allocated money to schools for upgrades. Where budget constraints exist, institutions should nevertheless engage in prevention and incident response planning to the extent of their capabilities. For further assistance, please contact your Spilman counsel and review this article on best practices. --- Nicholas A. Muto


Education Department Dismisses Thousands of Civil Rights Complaints at an ‘Unheard of’ Pace

“The Education Department dismissed civil rights complaints at such a rapid clip this year that former officials and advocates are concerned about a core agency function amid Trump administration plans to make deep staffing cuts.”

Why this is important: The rapid dismissal of civil rights complaints by the U.S. Department of Education (ED) raises serious concerns from many commentators about the agency’s commitment to protecting students from discrimination. According to reports, ED is closing cases at an “unheard of” pace, prompting alarm from former officials and civil rights advocates—especially amid plans by the Trump administration to significantly reduce staff in the Office for Civil Rights (OCR). The OCR is responsible for investigating violations involving race, gender, disability, and other protected categories in schools. A drastic reduction in complaint investigations – or the hasty disposition of complaints without the OCR’s usual case-by-case thorough review – may mean fewer protections for vulnerable students. The staffing cuts could compound the issue and ultimately result in an erosion of confidence in the OCR and a reluctance of aggrieved persons to bring issues forward. --- Kevin L. Carr


Will the Next Supreme Court Term Close the Transgender Athletic Debate?

“A pair of cases could establish precedent on whether transgender student athletes can compete on teams aligned with their gender identity.”

Why this is important: The U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to weigh in on whether transgender students can participate on sports teams that align with their gender identity. The key legal question is whether excluding transgender students from certain sports teams violates federal protections or whether states have the power to define participation based on biological sex. The courts so far have been divided, and now the Supreme Court is being asked to settle the issue. The cases also raise constitutional concerns under the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, which guarantees individuals’ equal treatment under the law, and Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination in education programs and activities that receive federal funding.

The rulings will have a major national impact as more states pass similar laws affecting school sports. A Supreme Court ruling could clarify the legal status of these laws and determine the future rights of transgender students in athletics across the country. For schools and athletic organizations, it could set new standards on how they must balance inclusivity with concerns about fairness and competition.

Supporters of the bans argue that allowing transgender girls to compete with cisgender girls (those whose gender identity matches their sex assigned at birth) is unfair because of physical advantages. Opponents argue that banning transgender girls from girls' sports is discriminatory and harmful to the well-being and dignity of transgender youth. That decision would shape how Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause are interpreted in the context of gender identity, not just for sports, but potentially for other areas of education and student life as well. --- Carter P. Capehart, Summer Associate


In North Carolina, It’s Do or DEI

“Federal and state officials have declared war on DEI at North Carolina’s colleges and universities.”

Why this is important: Hours after being sworn into office, President Trump signed an executive order to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs in the federal government and prohibit the awarding of government contracts to companies with DEI programs. Schools such as Harvard, Columbia, and many other institutions have faced criticism and budget cuts from the Trump administration for DEI programs. This ongoing battle against some of the most historic institutions in the United States has caused other schools to adjust their policies and structures to avoid similar backlash.

This article highlights the reviews, new approaches, and other steps that certain North Carolina colleges and graduate schools have taken in response to the shifting DEI landscape. According to The Assembly, after one such institution eliminated a course called “Black Lives Matter and the Law” and was rumored to be limiting what professors can teach, it resulted in an anonymous group of students sharing leaflets and signs to push back against these changes.

The Assembly reports that the UNC System has eliminated 60 jobs related to DEI as well as removed certain graduation requirements that may have DEI-related themes. While multiple administrators across the UNC System are attempting to comply with Trump administration policies, other schools have requested waivers from the DEI ban based on certain accreditation requirements.

To clarify some of the ambiguity, the North Carolina Legislature passed a bill in late July that effectively codifies the steps that the UNC System has taken to eliminate DEI programs at North Carolina colleges. While Governor Josh Stein vetoed the bill, North Carolina lawmakers gathered enough votes to override the veto. With the bill set to take effect, higher education institutions across North Carolina will be expected to align themselves with DEI cuts and changes akin to those already taken by the UNC System. --- Isaiah C. Robinson

 

 

 

 

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations. Attorney Advertising.

© Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

Written by:

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC
Contact
more
less

PUBLISH YOUR CONTENT ON JD SUPRA NOW

  • Increased visibility
  • Actionable analytics
  • Ongoing guidance

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide