Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Did the Department of Education issue guidance reclassifying professional degrees under Trump?
Executive summary
The Department of Education under the Trump administration has proposed changing which graduate programs count as “professional degrees” for federal loan rules as part of implementing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act; reporting lists nursing, accounting, architecture and several other fields as excluded from the professional-degree category used to set higher borrowing limits (e.g., $200,000 vs. $100,000 caps) [1] [2]. However, fact-checking reporting cautions that some outlets described the move as a completed “reclassification” while the Department’s rulemaking process or spokesperson statements indicate this was a proposed regulatory definition rather than an immediate, final reclassification [3] [4].
1. What the Department of Education did — a regulatory definition tied to loan caps
Reporting across national outlets describes a Department action to limit which post‑baccalaureate programs qualify as “professional degrees” for purposes of loan caps and the replacement Repayment Assistance Plan; programs not on the department’s list would face lower graduate borrowing limits and loss of Grad PLUS-type access, affecting fields such as nursing, accounting, architecture, education and others [1] [2] [5]. Coverage notes the practical consequence: only students in programs the department counts as “professional” would be eligible for the higher $200,000 professional cap while other graduate students would face a $100,000 cap or lower annual caps under the new framework [1] [6].
2. Who raised alarms — professional organizations and local coverage
Nursing groups including the American Association of Colleges of Nursing and the American Nurses Association publicly objected, saying excluding nursing ignores licensure and direct‑practice criteria and would constrain the pipeline into healthcare; state and local outlets and trade press amplified that concern and reported petitions and letters pressing the Department to reverse course [4] [5] [7]. Media pieces from Newsweek, The Independent, People and regional outlets framed the change as a significant shift for student financing in high‑cost programs [4] [2] [8] [9].
3. Fact‑checking and semantic dispute — proposal vs. final rule
Snopes’ examination stresses an important distinction: it is accurate that the Department proposed excluding a wide range of programs from the “professional degree” definition, which would change how loan eligibility is calculated, but it is not accurate to say the Department had already “reclassified” or definitively removed those degrees from the professional category at the time of Snopes’ review because the rule was in proposal stage and had not become final [3]. That nuance undercuts headlines asserting an immediate, completed reclassification [3].
4. Department messaging and political framing
A Department spokesperson told reporters the agency is using a long‑standing definition and said the proposed language aligns with historical precedent; one quoted official framed critiques as institutions protecting “their unlimited tuition ride on the taxpayer dime” [3]. Conversely, advocacy groups and numerous news stories framed the change as an implementation of President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill that narrows access to graduate borrowing and disproportionately affects certain professions [1] [10]. The reporting therefore shows competing narratives: the Department presenting continuity with precedent and critics describing a substantive policy narrowing tied to broader loan‑limit reforms [3] [1].
5. What remains uncertain or not found in reporting
Available sources do not mention every procedural detail about the rulemaking timeline or the Department’s finalized list of programs beyond the outlets’ cited examples; multiple articles report the Department expected final rules by spring 2026 but the exact legal status at each reporting moment varies [3]. Available sources do not mention whether Congress or the courts have intervened to block or modify the definition as of these reports [3] [1].
6. Bottom line for readers — interpret headlines with process in mind
Headlines saying the Education Department “reclassified” or “stopped counting” specific degrees (notably nursing) reflect real proposed regulatory changes that would alter who gets higher graduate borrowing limits and eliminate certain loan programs, but fact‑checking reporting cautions that the action was, at the time, a proposed regulatory definition rather than a finalized, retroactive reclassification [4] [3]. Readers should treat the policy as a consequential administrative shift being implemented under the One Big Beautiful Bill framework, while noting that legal, procedural and political steps in rulemaking could alter the final outcome [1] [3].