H.R.3739 - No Loan Forgiveness for Terrorists Act of 2025 (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.3739, the "No Loan Forgiveness for Terrorists Act of 2025," aims to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to exclude individuals employed by organizations with "substantial illegal purposes" from the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program. The bill specifically targets organizations involved in activities such as aiding illegal immigration, supporting terrorism, materially supporting child abuse, engaging in illegal discrimination, or repeatedly violating state tort laws. This legislation seeks to ensure that taxpayer-funded loan forgiveness does not benefit those associated with illicit activities.
Expected Effects
The bill's enactment would change the eligibility criteria for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. Individuals working for organizations found to be engaging in the specified illegal activities would no longer qualify for loan forgiveness. This could lead to legal challenges and increased scrutiny of organizations participating in the PSLF program.
Potential Benefits
- Prevents taxpayer money from supporting individuals working for organizations involved in illegal activities.
- Strengthens the integrity of the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program.
- May deter organizations from engaging in illegal activities to maintain eligibility for PSLF benefits for their employees.
- Reinforces the principle that public service should not be associated with illegal or harmful conduct.
- Potentially reduces financial support for organizations involved in terrorism, child abuse, and other illicit activities.
Potential Disadvantages
- May disproportionately affect individuals in certain sectors or organizations, even if they are not directly involved in illegal activities.
- Could lead to increased administrative burden and potential legal challenges in determining what constitutes a "substantial illegal purpose."
- May create a chilling effect on legitimate organizations that provide services to vulnerable populations, such as immigrants or at-risk youth.
- The broad language of the bill could be interpreted in ways that restrict access to loan forgiveness for individuals working for organizations with differing political views.
- Potential for increased scrutiny and stigmatization of organizations and individuals based on subjective interpretations of "illegal purpose."
Most Disadvantaged Areas:
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutional alignment is complex. While Congress has the power to regulate federal spending and set conditions for loan forgiveness programs under Article I, Section 8 (the Spending Clause), the specific provisions targeting certain activities could raise concerns under the First Amendment (freedom of speech and association) if they are overly broad or target protected expression. The due process clause of the Fifth Amendment could also be implicated if the definition of "substantial illegal purpose" is vague or leads to arbitrary enforcement. Further, the Tenth Amendment could be invoked if the federal government is seen as unduly interfering with state tort laws.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).