Judge rejects Trump bid to end student-loan forgiveness program

• The judge ruled that the lawsuit challenging changes to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program for practicing public-service workers, which was filed on June 30, 2026.
• Joun, who stated that the Department’s decision to revise the rules for student-loan forgiveness is unlawful.
• Judge rejected the lawsuit filed for reconsideration of the organization’s decision, noting that the judge’s name was such that it could not be a new criminal liability through interpretation.

In a ruling, the federal judge overturned the Department of Education’s decision regarding those who perform public-service work. The decision was made by U.S. District Judge Myong Joun of Massachusetts, according to AP and Independent.

The judge said that the changes, which would have come into effect between the Department of Education and the forgiveness program, could violate the law. The judge also ruled that the new ruling was unlawful.

Following the decision, the Department of Education was ordered to accept more than 20 statements from applicants with non-profit organizations. The Department of Education was also ordered not to violate the law.

Congress created Public Service Loan Forgiveness in 2007, allowing participants to have their federal student loans forgiven after 10 years of public-service work.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration introduced new rules, which allowed borrowers to have their loans forgiven only if they worked in a way that would “satisfy” the requirements. The Department’s lawsuit was aimed at preventing borrowers from having their loans forgiven.

In particular, the administration’s rules would have changed the group’s program so that it could be used by borrowers with “unlawful” organizations. The judge said that the Department’s decision could not be considered lawful, and that it had violated the law.

The judge also said that the Department’s decision could not be considered lawful, and that it had violated the law. The court further ruled that the Department’s decision could not be considered lawful, and that it had violated the law.

In addition, the judge ordered the Department to accept more than 100 pages of written documents in support of the plaintiffs’ claims.

Tags: USA/Well-being/Politics