Were any executive orders or regulations under Trump aimed at redefining professional occupations including nursing?
Executive summary
The Trump administration’s 2025 One Big Beautiful Bill Act and accompanying Department of Education rulemaking changed which graduate programs count as “professional degrees,” a move that removes nursing and several allied-health programs from that category and tightens federal Grad PLUS/loan limits for affected students (e.g., professional-degree borrowers get a $200,000 cap vs. $100,000 for graduate students) [1] [2]. Reporting and government fact sheets confirm the change prompted widespread concern among nursing groups and state press, while the Education Department frames the change as a loan-limit reform developed through negotiated rulemaking [3] [4].
1. What the action actually did — reclassification, not an EO renaming occupations
This policy change came through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and a Department of Education regulatory definition of “professional programs,” not a single executive order that “redefined” occupations. Multiple outlets report the Department’s new regulatory definition excludes nursing, physician assistant, nurse practitioner and other programs from the professional-degree category and subjects them to stricter borrowing limits [5] [6] [7]. The Department’s fact sheet frames the move as implementation of loan-limit changes in the Act and describes negotiated rulemaking involvement [4].
2. How this affects students and the profession — concrete borrowing limits
Under the new framework, students in degrees the Education Department designates as “professional” are eligible for higher aggregate federal borrowing limits (reported as $200,000 for professional students vs. $100,000 for graduate students in news coverage). Excluding nursing and certain allied-health programs from the “professional” label therefore reduces how much federal loan support many graduate-level nursing and allied-health students can access, potentially altering career-cost calculations and recruitment into advanced practice roles [1] [2] [7].
3. Sources of pushback — nursing organizations and state/local reporting
National nursing bodies and advocacy groups publicly objected. The American Nurses Association and the American Association of Colleges of Nursing urged the Department to reconsider and warned the change could threaten graduate education access and the health workforce pipeline; local and regional outlets likewise described the change as limiting nurses’ borrowing and raising workforce concerns [3] [1] [5] [6].
4. The administration’s defense — negotiated rulemaking and loan reform framing
The Department of Education’s “Myth vs. Fact” release argues the change is a loan‑limit reform tied to the Act, emphasizes negotiated rulemaking participation and denies that exclusion equates to a view that nurses are not professionals; the fact sheet also stresses the limits apply to graduate programs and do not affect undergraduate nursing degrees [4]. That statement frames the action as fiscal and technical rather than a value judgment about occupations [4].
5. Where reporters and government documents agree and disagree
Reporting across Newsweek, CNN, The Independent and regional outlets consistently describes nursing and several allied-health fields being excluded from the “professional” regulatory list and the attendant loan-limit consequences [8] [7] [2] [6]. The Education Department agrees the regulatory definition changed but disputes interpretations that the move is an attack on nursing as a profession, emphasizing process and the scope of the loan limits [4]. The divergence centers on intent and downstream workforce impacts, not on whether the reclassification occurred.
6. Was this done by executive order or a regulation?
Available sources show the change was implemented through legislation (the One Big Beautiful Bill Act) and a Department of Education regulatory definition tied to loan limits rather than a single presidential executive order that directly reclassified occupations. The Federal Register lists many 2025 Trump EOs, but coverage and the Department’s releases identify rulemaking and statutory implementation — not an EO that explicitly renames nursing as non‑professional — as the mechanism for the loan‑limit changes [9] [4] [1].
7. Practical context and likely consequences
Journalistic accounts and sector experts warn that tightening graduate borrowing for nursing and allied-health programs could raise financial barriers to advanced training and complicate workforce planning in a sector already reporting shortages; the Department counters that the change was debated in negotiated rulemaking and targeted to graduate borrowing limits [5] [7] [4]. The true scale of downstream effects depends on how institutions, employers, states and alternative funding respond — reporting documents disagreement about magnitude and long-term impact [8] [6].
8. Limitations and what reporting does not say
Available sources do not mention any executive order that explicitly “redefined” nursing as a non‑professional occupation language-for-language; instead, they document statutory/regulatory changes affecting loan classifications and limits [1] [4]. Sources also do not provide long-term, empirical outcomes yet — the actual effects on enrollment, workforce supply and patient care will require future study and data collection not present in current reporting [7].
Bottom line: the Trump administration’s 2025 policy package and Department of Education rulemaking changed which graduate programs qualify as “professional degrees” for federal loan‑limit purposes and excluded nursing from that category, prompting major pushback from nursing groups; the change was implemented via legislation and regulatory action tied to loan limits rather than a single executive order that renamed occupations [1] [4] [5].