Judge blocks Trump’s rule limiting federal student loans for certain grad school borrowers

A federal judge temporarily blocked a new Trump administration rule that limits how much certain graduate students can borrow based on their field of study, days before that policy was set to go into effect.

U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell in Washington froze, for now, some of the federal student loan caps established by the U.S. Department of Education. The department was implementing the limits set in President Donald Trump‘s tax and spending bill, the “one big beautiful bill act.”

Under the new regulations, previously set to begin on July 1, most graduate students are subject to a $20,500 a year borrowing cap, while so-called professional students can take out up to $50,000 annually. Previously, graduate students were able to borrow as much as their program cost to attend.

The order, issued late on Wednesday, stays the Education Department’s definition of a “professional degree.” The Trump administration had identified 11 degrees, including medicine, dentistry and theology, that fit under that label.

The Education Department is “reviewing the order and will take appropriate action,” said Ellen Keast, press secretary for higher education at the agency.

The plaintiffs challenging the policy, including the American Association of Nurse Practitioners, argued that the rule “arbitrarily and capriciously” defined a professional degree, resulting in “profound consequences” for fields excluded from the category, such as nursing and education.

“We are pleased that those who rely on the Direct Loan Program to contribute to their communities by seeking degrees in nursing, public health, education, and marriage and family therapy will be able to do so,” said Skye Perryman, the president and CEO of Democracy Forward, the liberal group that represented the plaintiffs.

While Howell set aside the Trump administration’s professional degree definition, she did not go as far as to block the government from enforcing the new graduate loan caps. She added that she could not remedy the plaintiffs’ “primary frustration” over the end of uncapped borrowing.