Which federal agencies or state governments implemented Trump-era rules impacting nurses?
Executive summary
The U.S. Department of Education — under the Trump administration and implementing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) — has proposed and begun rulemaking that excludes many nursing programs from the regulation’s definition of “professional degree,” which would subject graduate nursing students to lower federal loan caps ($20,500 per year and $100,000 lifetime for non‑professional graduate students vs. higher caps for “professional” programs) [1] [2]. Separately, the Trump administration’s HHS has repealed a Biden‑era nursing‑home staffing mandate that would have required higher minimum staffing and 24/7 on‑site RNs, a move critics say weakens protections for long‑term‑care residents [3] [4].
1. What federal action changed nursing’s regulatory status
The immediate actor was the U.S. Department of Education, which during negotiated rulemaking to implement the OBBBA advanced an interpretation of the longstanding regulatory definition of “professional degree” that largely excludes many nursing and allied health graduate programs, moving them into the lower‑cap category for graduate borrowing [5] [6]. The department says it is applying a definition from existing federal rules and expects to finalize regulations in 2026, but the negotiated‑rulemaking outcome has already prompted media and advocacy response [5] [7].
2. What borrowing limits those federal rules trigger
Under OBBBA implementation language cited by multiple outlets, graduate students in programs not counted as “professional” would be limited to $20,500 in federal loans per academic year with a $100,000 aggregate cap, while students in programs classified as “professional” could access higher annual and aggregate limits (examples cited include a $50,000 annual/$200,000 aggregate figure for professional students in reporting) [1] [2] [8].
3. Other federal agencies that took action affecting nurses
Health and Human Services (HHS) is the other major federal actor cited in reporting: HHS repealed the Biden‑era nursing‑home staffing rule that would have required increased nurse staffing and a registered nurse on site 24 hours a day, saying the mandate would have disproportionately harmed rural communities; critics say the repeal removes a safety floor for residents [3] [4]. Those are distinct federal levers — Education controls student loan rules that affect the pipeline of advanced nurses, while HHS controls regulatory requirements for nursing‑home staffing and safety.
4. State governments’ role and responses
State legislatures and agencies are responding in variable ways. Reporting notes that some states (Wisconsin as one example) had already shifted resources toward nurse‑education incentives, and nursing groups and state higher‑education leaders across the country are lobbying the Education Department to reconsider the classification because they fear the loan limits will impair recruitment into advanced practice and educator roles [6] [9]. Specific state executive actions repealing or imposing staffing standards are not detailed in these sources; available sources do not mention any state governments reclassifying nursing degrees in response to the Education Department’s rulemaking [6] [5].
5. Who is objecting and why
Major nursing organizations — including the American Nurses Association and the American Association of Colleges of Nursing — have publicly condemned the exclusion, arguing that lowering borrowing caps will make graduate nursing education less accessible, worsen shortages of advanced‑practice nurses and nurse educators, and threaten patient care quality [10] [1]. Media coverage and nursing unions frame the Education Department move as a material funding cut for many students [11] [2].
6. Defenders of the change and their argument
Some commentators and conservative outlets argue the reclassification is a technical application of a narrow 1965 regulatory definition and that most nursing programs already borrow below the proposed caps, so the rule addresses taxpayer exposure to unlimited Grad PLUS borrowing rather than denigrating nursing as a profession [12] [5] [7]. The Department of Education has made similar statements in press materials linked by reporting [2] [5].
7. The practical implications for nurses and nursing homes
If the Education Department’s approach stands, graduate nursing students who need more than the new caps would face fewer federal borrowing options, potentially limiting enrollment or shifting students toward private loans and institutional aid — outcomes nursing groups warn will constrain supply of advanced nurses and educators [2] [6]. Separately, HHS’s repeal of the nursing‑home staffing mandate removes a prospective federal minimum staffing requirement, which critics say will worsen care in under‑staffed facilities [3] [4].
8. Limits of available reporting and where uncertainty remains
Reporting shows federal Education and HHS actions and widespread professional pushback, but available sources do not document final regulatory text in effect nationwide beyond the proposed/negotiated changes or catalog a list of specific states that have adopted mirror definitions or countermeasures; final Education rules were expected in 2026 according to the department [5] [2]. The long‑term impact on enrollment, workforce size and patient outcomes is not yet quantified in these sources [6] [7].
Bottom line: two distinct Trump‑era federal levers have moved nursing policy recently — Department of Education rulemaking that narrows which degrees qualify as “professional” for higher loan caps, and HHS action repealing a Biden‑era nursing‑home staffing mandate — and each has produced sharply divided interpretations between nursing advocates and administration defenders [1] [3] [5].