Bill strips loan forgiveness from workers at organizations sponsors deem ideologically unacceptable.
S. 1845 — No Loan Forgiveness for Terrorists Act of 2025 · Filed by Jim Banks (R-IN) · 2 cosponsors · Introduced May 21, 2025 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill amends the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program to exclude employees of organizations engaged in activities with a 'substantial illegal purpose' from receiving loan forgiveness. The bill defines such activities to include immigration law violations, material support for terrorism, child abuse (including a contentious definition involving gender-affirming care), discrimination patterns, and state tort law violations. Employees of organizations meeting these criteria would lose eligibility for federal loan forgiveness even if their individual jobs are otherwise public service.
Why we flagged it
The bill uses federal loan-forgiveness eligibility as a tool to punish workers employed by organizations the bill's sponsors view as ideologically objectionable, by embedding contested political definitions (e.g., gender-affirming care as 'child abuse') into federal law.
What the text implies
- The bill's definition of 'substantial illegal purpose' includes legal activity (gender-affirming medical care is lawful in many states) reframed as illegal, creating a federal eligibility rule that punishes workers for employer conduct that may not actually violate any law.
- Workers at nonprofits, civil rights organizations, immigration-advocacy groups, or LGBTQ+ service providers could lose loan forgiveness eligibility if their employer is deemed to engage in any of the listed activities, even if the worker's own job is unrelated to that conduct.
The full analysis lists 4 implications of this text.
Who it affects
Workers at organizations the bill targets lose access to a federal benefit (loan forgiveness) based on their employer's conduct, not their own. The bill's definition of 'substantial illegal purpose' includes vague and contested categories (e.g., 'trafficking of children to transgender sanctuary States') that conflate legal activity with illegality, creating uncertainty about which organizations are actually excluded and exposing workers to collateral punishment for employer conduct.