[House Report 119-780]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
119th Congress] [Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session] [119-780
======================================================================
PROTECT ECONOMIC AND ACADEMIC FREEDOM ACT OF
2026
_______
August 27, 2026.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Walberg, from the Committee on Education and Workforce,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
together with
MINORITY VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 4795]
The Committee on Education and Workforce, to whom was
referred the bill (H.R. 4795) to amend the Higher Education Act
of 1965 to prohibit an institution that participates in a
nonexpressive commercial boycott of Israel from being eligible
for certain funds under that Act, to require an institution
that participates in certain programs under that Act to certify
that students are not unreasonably obstructed from
participating in academic programs in Israel, and for other
purposes having considered the same, reports favorably thereon
with an amendment and recommends that the bill be as amended do
pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Protect Economic and Academic
Freedom Act of 2026''.
SEC. 2. INELIGIBILITY OF INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION PARTICIPATING
IN CERTAIN NONEXPRESSIVE COMMERCIAL BOYCOTTS.
Section 487(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1094(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(30)(A) The institution will not engage in a nonexpressive
commercial boycott of a major strategic partner of the United
States.
``(B) For purposes of this paragraph:
``(i) The term `major strategic partner' means, with
respect to the United States--
``(I) a country described in section 4 of
Public Law 113-296; or
``(II) an entity licensed or regulated by, or
organized under the laws of, such a country.
``(ii) The term `nonexpressive commercial boycott of
a major strategic partner--
``(I) means a commercial action (including
engaging in refusals to deal and terminating
business activities) that--
``(aa) is intended to limit
commercial relations with a major
strategic partner; and
``(bb) is not based on a valid
business reason; and
``(II) does not include actions described in
regulations issued to provide for the
exceptions described in section 1773(a)(2) of
the Anti-Boycott Act of 2018 (50 U.S.C.
4842(a)(2)).''.
SEC. 3. ELIGIBILITY FOR TITLE VI FUNDS.
Title VI of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1121 et
seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new sections:
SEC. 639. INSTITUTIONAL CERTIFICATIONS.
``(a) Annual Requirement for Institutional Eligibility.--Not later
than July 31 of each calendar year beginning on or after the date of
enactment of the Protect Economic and Academic Freedom Act of 2026, an
institution of higher education participating or applying to
participate in any program under this title shall submit to the
Secretary the certification required under subsection (b). An
institution that does not submit such certification by July 31 of a
calendar year shall be ineligible to receive any funds under this title
in the first fiscal year that begins after such July 31, including any
funds under this title that would otherwise have been available to the
institution in such fiscal year for a grant awarded during a previous
fiscal year.
``(b) Certification.--An institution shall certify to the Secretary
that, for the period beginning on the date of such certification and
ending on July 31 of the following year, the institution will--
``(1) permit students and faculty of the certifying
institution to participate in academic programs, including
conferences, teaching exchanges, cultural exchanges, study
abroad programs, joint research, and other collaborative
educational activities, in a major strategic partner (as
defined in section 487(a)(30)) of the United States in the same
manner, and under the same terms and conditions, as students
and faculty of the institution are permitted to participate in
academic programs in other foreign countries; and
``(2) permit students and faculty of postsecondary
educational institutions in such a major strategic partner to
participate in academic programs offered by the certifying
institution, including conferences, teaching exchanges,
cultural exchanges, study abroad programs, joint research, and
other collaborative educational activities, in the same manner,
and under the same terms and conditions, as students and
faculty of other foreign postsecondary educational institutions
that are not in such a major strategic partner.
``SEC. 639A. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
``It is the sense of Congress that limitations on cooperative
efforts by institutions of higher education, consortia of such
institutions, or partnerships between nonprofit educational
organizations and institutions of higher education with a major
strategic partner (as defined in section 487(a)(30)) of the United
States do not serve the security, stability, and economic vitality of
the United States.''.
Purpose
H.R. 4795, Protect Economic and Academic Freedom Act of
2026, amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA) to prohibit
an institution that participates in a nonexpressive commercial
boycott of Israel from receiving federal student aid under
Title IV of the HEA. The bill also requires an institution that
receives funds under Title VI to allow students and faculty to
participate in academic programs in Israel, and students and
faculty from Israel to participate in academic programs at the
institution, in the same manner in which the institution
provides such access to institutions in other countries and
students and faculty from other countries to the institution.
Committee Action
118TH CONGRESS
First Session--Hearings
On November 14, 2023, the Subcommittee on Higher Education
and Workforce Development held a hearing titled ``Confronting
the Scourge of Antisemitism on Campus.'' The purpose of the
hearing was to discuss antisemitism on college campuses.
Testifying before the Subcommittee were Rabbi Moshe Hauer,
Executive Vice President, Orthodox Union, New York, New York;
Mr. Kenneth L. Marcus, Founder and Chairman, Brandeis Center,
Washington, D.C.; Ms. Stacy Burdett, Independent Consultant in
Antisemitism Prevention and Response, Silver Spring, Maryland;
and Ms. Sahar Tartak, Student, Yale University, New Haven,
Connecticut.
On December 5, 2023, the full Committee held a hearing
titled ``Holding Campus Leaders Accountable and Confronting
Antisemitism.'' The purpose of the hearing was to discuss
antisemitism on college campuses with key college presidents.
Testifying before the Committee were Dr. Claudine Gay,
President, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts; Ms.
Liz Magill, President, University of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Dr. Pamela Nadell, Professor of
History and Jewish Studies, American University, Washington,
D.C.; and Dr. Sally Kornbluth, President, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Second Session--Hearing
On May 23, 2024, the full Committee held a hearing titled
``Calling for Accountability: Stopping Antisemitic College
Chaos.'' The purpose of the hearing was to examine antisemitism
and responses to protest encampments on college campuses.
Testifying before the Committee were Mr. Michael Schill,
President, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois; Dr.
Jonathan Holloway, President, Rutgers, the State University of
New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey; Mr. Frederick M.
Lawrence, Secretary and CEO, Phi Beta Kappa Society,
Washington, D.C.; and Dr. Gene Block, Chancellor, University of
California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
Second Session--Legislative Action
On November 26, 2024, Representative Virginia Foxx (R-NC)
introduced Protect Economic Freedom Act (H.R. 10257), which was
referred solely to the Committee on Education and the
Workforce.
119TH CONGRESS
First Session--Hearings
On May 7, 2025, the full Committee held a hearing titled
``Beyond the Ivy League: Stopping the Spread of Antisemitism on
American Campuses.'' The purpose of the hearing was to examine
the rise in antisemitism on college campuses beyond the Ivy
League. Testifying before the Committee were Dr. Wendy Raymond,
President, Haverford College, Haverford, Pennsylvania; Dr.
Robert Manuel, President, DePaul University, Chicago, Illinois;
Mr. David Cole, George J. Mitchell, Professor in Law and Public
Policy, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, D.C.; and
Dr. Jeffrey Armstrong, President, California Polytechnic State
University, San Luis Obispo, California.
On July 15, 2025, the full Committee held a hearing titled
``Antisemitism in Higher Education: Examining the Role of
Faculty, Funding, and Ideology.'' The purpose of the hearing
was to examine the main drivers of antisemitism on college
campuses. Testifying before the Committee were Dr. Robert M.
Groves, Interim President, Georgetown University, Washington,
D.C.; Dr. Felix V. Matos Rodriguez, Chancellor, The City
University of New York, New York, New York; Mr. Matt Nosanchuk,
Principal, Mattnos Strategies, Washington, D.C.; Dr. Richard K.
Lyons, Chancellor, University of California, Berkeley,
Berkeley, California.
119TH CONGRESS
Legislative Action
On September 29, 2025, Representative Foxx introduced H.R.
4795, Protect Economic and Academic Freedom Act of 2025, which
was referred solely to the Committee on Education and
Workforce. On June 25, 2026, the Committee considered H.R. 4795
in legislative session and reported it favorably, as amended,
to the House of Representatives by a recorded vote of 24-9.
Representative Foxx offered an Amendment in the Nature of a
Substitute that places the prohibition on engaging in a
nonexpressive commercial boycott directly within the program
participation agreement under Title IV of the HEA, removes the
separate annual certification requirement for institutions, and
removes the requirement that the Secretary of Education publish
a list of institutions that did not comply with the annual
certification requirement. The amendment passed by voice vote.
Committee Views
INTRODUCTION
Antisemitism on college and university campuses has
increased significantly in recent years, particularly following
the October 7, 2023, terror attacks. During the 2024-2025
academic year, 2,334 antisemitic incidents were reported on
college and university campuses nationwide, the highest number
ever recorded.\1\ Antisemitic incidents on college campuses
increased by more than 700 percent between 2022 and 2025.\2\ In
addition, a 2025 survey found that 48.3 percent of non-Jewish
students reported witnessing or experiencing anti-Jewish
behavior on campus during the previous year, while 47.6 percent
endorsed at least one anti-Jewish attitude.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\https://www.hillel.org/antisemitism-on-college-campuses-
incident-tracking/.
\2\Ibid.
\3\https://adl.org/resources/press-release/adls-2026-campus-
antisemitism-report-card-reveals-
significant-progress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND ON THE BOYCOTT, DIVESTMENT,
AND SANCTIONS (BDS) MOVEMENT
The BDS movement is a loose grouping of actors from various
countries that advocate for or engage in economic measures
targeting Israel or Israel-related individuals, organizations,
and businesses.\4\ The Arab League imposed a boycott of Jews in
Mandatory Palestine beginning in 1945, three years before the
establishment of the State of Israel. The modem BDS movement
was founded in 2001 during the United Nations' World Conference
Against Racism in Durban, South Africa.\5\ In July 2005, a
coalition of Palestinian organizations adopted the BDS movement
to call for the use of boycotts, divestment campaigns, and
sanctions as a means of pressuring Israel to change its
policies toward Palestinians.\6\ Specifically, the movement has
``the call'' for Israel to end its occupation and colonization
of all Arab lands and dismantle the wall constructed by Israel
along the border between Israel and the West Bank, and within
the West Bank, to protect Israelis from Palestinian violence;
recognize the fundamental rights of the Arab Palestinian
citizens of Israel to full equality and respect; and protect
and promote the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to
their homes and properties as stipulated in UN Resolution
194.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/
20191203_R44281_lc95dd528315abe4cb3528c526eae
77488759f52.pdf.
\5\https://www.ajc.org/campusbds.
\6\Ibid.
\7\https://www.bdsmovement.net/call.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BDS campaigns frequently demand the ``divestment'' of
university, municipal, church, union, and other investment
portfolios from companies that advocates claim ``aid Israel's
occupation,'' as well as call for the ``boycott'' of Israeli
products, professionals, professional associations and academic
institutions, and artistic performances.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounder/boycott-divestment-
and-sanctions-campaign-bds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In recent years, BDS-related activism has gained
significant traction on American college and university
campuses, particularly following the October 7, 2023, terror
attacks. Student organizations, faculty groups, and unions have
increasingly used BDS campaigns to pressure universities to
alter investment practices and adopt policies aligned with the
movement's objectives. This movement became substantially more
widespread during the 2023-2024 academic year, as
demonstrations, encampments, and divestment campaigns engulfed
higher education.
Title VI of the HEA and the BDS Movement
Title VI of the HEA authorizes programs and funding for the
Department of Education (ED) to award grants in support of
international and foreign language studies.\9\ Part A of Title
VI authorizes National Resource Centers that award four-year
competitive grants to institutions of higher education to
establish and maintain an infrastucture for providing
international studies and modern foreign language
instruction.\10\ Title VI programs have been a source of
antisemitism in general, and the BDS movement specifically, on
college campuses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46508.
\10\https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46508.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Georgetown's Title VI National Resource Center on the
Middle East and North Africa (NRC-MENA) provides an
illustrative example. The NRC-MENA operates the Center for
Contemporary Arab Studies (CCAS), which has become a platform
to promote antisemitism and the BDS movement. Three of CCAS'
five ``core'' staff actively support the BDS movement.\11\
Additionally, in December 2023, CCAS signed an agreement for
Georgetown to host the Middle East Studies Association (MESA).
Today, MESA effectively functions as an anti-Israel advocacy
group that has adopted a resolution endorsing BDS. Under the
agreement, CCAS granted MESA space on its main campus at no
cost.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\Fida Adely; Marwa Daoudy; Rochelle A. Davis. https://
palestineandpraxis.weebly.com/.
\12\https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/kw4w8wuxj9ecwpevss7gp/How-
Campuses-Became-Hotbeds-the-Rise-of-Radical-Antisemitism-on-College-
Campuses.pdf?rlkey=
tsuha6vybakp5oqlxhto1euth&e=2&st=08c027lp&dl=0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CCAS also runs an education outreach program that is
partially supported by its NRC-MENA grant. In February 2025,
CCAS co-hosted an event titled ``Palestine in the
Classroom''\13\ CCAS' K-14 education outreach director, Susan
Douglass, is an avowed BDS supporter. The Alwaleed Bin Talal
Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding (Center) is part of
Georgetown's School of Foreign Service and is also part of NRC-
MENA at Georgetown.\14\ The Center's faculty consistently
advance narratives that whitewash Islamism and demonize Israel,
all while educating the next generation of government servants,
producing reference works used across academia, and serving as
consultants to policymakers, media, corporate executives, and
others.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\https://ccas.georgetown.edu/resources/k-14-outreach/events-for-
educators/.
\14\https://ccas.georgetown.edu/about/national-resource-center-
mena/.
\15\https://isgap.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/FTM-GEORGETOWN-
REPORT-2025-05-23-1.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BDS Campaigns and Resolutions on College Campuses
During the 2023-2024 academic year, at least 86 BDS
resolutions were considered across undergraduate, graduate, and
professional student organizations and faculty unions.\16\
Seventy-seven passed and nine were voted down. In November
2025, Cornell University's graduate student union adopted a BDS
resolution that called for resistance ``by any means
necessary.''\17\ Within the University of California (UC)
system, United Auto Workers 4811, a union that represents
thousands of academic workers, vowed to wage a campaign to
pressure UC campuses to adopt BDS.\18\ At Northwestern
University, faculty members and Northwestern's provost were
openly willing to appease encampment organizers in their
efforts to demand the university boycott Sabra hummus because
of the brand's perception as an Israeli product.\19\ At
Haverford College, administrators caved to the antisemitic
blood libel demands of Students for the Liberation of Palestine
to ``Say No to Blood Donuts,'' refusing to serve previously
ordered donuts from Federal Donuts, a Jewish-Israeli owned
chain, at Commencement in 2024.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\https://www.adl.org/resources/report/anti-israel-activism-us-
campuses-2023-2024.
\17\https://www.timesofisrael.com/cornell-grad-student-union-
approves-bds-resolution-backing-resistance-by-any-means/.
\18\https://www.fairnesscenter.org/cases/yaniv-v-uaw-4811/.
\19\Text Message from Nour Kteily, Professor of Mgmt. and Org., Nw.
U. Kellog Sch. Of Mgmt., to Kathleen Hagerty, Provost, Nw. U (Apr. 27,
2024 3:18 AM) (on file with Comm.).
\20\https://www.inquirer.com/education/haverford-president-email-
tim-walberg-20250626.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BDS campaigns have been accompanied by allegations of
harassment, intimidation, exclusion, and discrimination
directed at students who identify as Jewish or express support
for Israel.\21\ In April 2024, at a BDS hearing at the
University of Albany, a student looked around and stated,
``Those who do not support this (BDS) should feel unsafe on
campus. I will make sure you do not feel safe.''\22\ In March
2024, anti-Israel protesters at Vanderbilt University shoved a
security guard as they protested the university's removal of a
proposed amendment to align the school's student government
with the demands of the BDS movement.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\https://edworkforce.house.gov/uploadedfiles/
10.30.24_committee_on_education_and_
the_workforce_republican_staff_report_-
_antisemitism_on_college_campuses_exposed.pdf.
\22\Ibid.
\23\https://www.adl.org/resources/report/anti-israel-activism-us-
campuses-2023-2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BDS Legal Status
The core of the constitutional debate around BDS is whether
anti-BDS legislation regulates economic conduct or political
speech protected under the First Amendment.\24\ Opponents
contend that these boycotts are considered protected expressive
conduct and collective political action, a classification
established by Supreme Court cases involving nonviolent
boycotts.\25\ Conversely, proponents of anti-BDS legislation
assert that such laws regulate commercial conduct and not
political speech, with the state merely acting as a proprietor
in contracting decisions.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\https://legalclarity.org/anti-bds-bill-and-state-laws-
constitutional-challenges/.
\25\Ibid.
\26\Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Supreme Court has heard numerous arguments on the
balance between regulating boycott activity and free speech. In
NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co. (1982),\27\ the Supreme Court
held that states may not prohibit peaceful political activities
associated with a boycott, including speech, assembly, and
advocacy. However, Claiborne did not establish a constitutional
right to engage in all forms of boycott activity and instead
distinguished between protected expressive conduct and economic
activity that may be regulated by the government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886 (1982).
In a related case, Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and
Institutional Rights, Inc. (2006),\28\ the Supreme Court ruled
that a law school treating military recruiters differently from
other recruiters was not inherently expressive and thus that
differential treatment was not protected by the First
Amendment. The Supreme Court stated,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/547/47/#tab-
opinion-1962043.
. . . law schools `expressed' their disagreement with
the military by treating military recruiters
differently from other recruiters. But these actions
were expressive only because the law schools
accompanied their conduct with speech explaining it . .
. An observer who sees military recruiters interviewing
away from the law school has no way of knowing whether
the law school is expressing its disapproval of the
military, all the law school's interview rooms are
full, or the military recruiters decided for reasons of
their own that they would rather interview someplace
else . . . The expressive component of a law school's
action is not created by the conduct itself but by the
speech that accompanies it.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/547/47/#tab-
opinion-1962043.
The Supreme Court ruled that there was a ``substantial
government interest'' in requiring equal treatment of military
recruiters on college campuses and ruled against the law
school.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/547/47/#tab-
opinion-1962043.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This distinction between expressive activity and other
activity was central to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Eighth Circuit's decision in Arkansas Times LP v. Waldrip
(2022),\31\ which upheld Arkansas Act 710. That law prohibits
state entities from contracting with private companies unless
the contract includes a certification that the company ``is not
currently engaged in, and agrees for the duration of the
contract not to engage in, a boycott of Israel.''\32\ The court
rejected the argument that the statute violated the First
Amendment by restricting participation in boycotts of Israel.
In doing so, the court explained that Claiborne protected the
expressive activities accompanying a boycott, not the
commercial decision itself to refuse to do business with a
particular entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\Arkansas Times LP v. Waldrip, 37 F.4th 1386 (8th Cir. 2022).
\32\Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The court emphasized that states retain broad authority to
regulate economic activity and concluded that the Arkansas law
targeted discriminatory commercial conduct rather than
political expression. The Eighth Circuit further reasoned that
Arkansas's law did not prohibit individuals or organizations
from criticizing Israel, advocating for a boycott, or
protesting the law itself. Rather, the statute prohibited
certain contracting entities from engaging in economic
decisions that discriminate against Israel. Because such
purchasing and contracting decisions are not inherently
expressive and generally convey no message unless accompanied
by additional speech, the court concluded that the law
regulated non-expressive commercial conduct that does not
implicate the First Amendment in the same manner as political
advocacy.
ISRAEL DESIGNATION AS ``MAJOR STRATEGIC PARTNER''
Antisemitism is deeply concerning and simultaneously
undermines Israel's unique relationship with the United States.
Israel has been designated as a ``major strategic partner'' of
the United States, which is a unique designation. This
designation came from the 2014 United States-Israel Strategic
Partnership Act, signed by President Obama and introduced by
former California Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA).\33\ The bill
was passed by unanimous consent in the Senate and by voice vote
in the House.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/2673.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION EFFORTS TO COMBAT ANTISEMITISM
During the first Trump administration, President Trump
issued Executive Order (EO) 13899, Combating Anti-Semitism.\34\
The EO directed federal agencies enforcing Title VI to consider
antisemitic discrimination as a form of prohibited
discrimination based on race, color, or national origin when
appropriate. The Order also instructed agencies to consider the
International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's (IHRA) Working
Definition of Antisemitism and the ``Contemporary Examples of
Anti-Semitism'' identified by IHRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/
executive-order-combating-anti-semitism/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 29, 2025, President Trump issued EO 14188,
Additional Measures to Combat Anti-Semitism, which reaffirmed
EO 13899 and directed federal agencies, including ED, to
identify and utilize available civil and criminal enforcement
authorities to address antisemitic harassment and
discrimination. The EO specifically cited reports of
harassment, intimidation, and exclusion of Jewish students on
college campuses and directed agencies to take additional
actions to enforce federal civil rights laws. Following EO
14188, the Department of Justice established a multi-agency
Task Force to Combat Antisemitism. The Task Force includes
representatives from the Departments of Justice, ED, Health and
Human Services, and other federal agencies and identified
addressing antisemitic harassment in schools as a priority.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-
formation-task-force-combat-anti-semitism.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusion
Given the dangers of antisemitism and the BDS movement,
Congress should advance reforms to ensure institutions do not
engage in harmful economic boycotts of Israel, a key ally of
the United States that bears the unique designation of a
``major strategic partner.'' Additionally, Jewish students
should not be isolated or harassed simply because they are
Jewish. H.R. 4795 sends a strong message that American colleges
and universities should not be hotbeds for antisemitic actions
or boycotts.
Summary
H.R. 4795 SECTION-BY-SECTION
Section 1. Short Title
Identifies the short title as Protect Economic and Academic
Freedom Act of 2026.
Section 2. Ineligibility of Institutions of Higher Education
Participating in Certain Non-Expressive Commercial Boycotts
Amends the program participation agreement with a
requirement for institutions to not engage in a nonexpressive
commercial boycott of a major strategic partner of the United
States.
Defines ``major strategic partner.''
Defines ``nonexpressive commercial boycott.''
Section 3. Eligibility for HEA Title VI Funds
Requires institutions receiving funds under Title
VI to annually certify by July 31 of each calendar year that
the institution will do the following:
Permit students and faculty of the
certifying institution to participate in academic
programs in a major strategic partner in the same
manner and under the same terms and conditions as
students and faculty are permitted to participate in
academic programs in other foreign countries.
Permit students and faculty of
postsecondary institutions located in a major strategic
partner the ability to participate in academic programs
offered by the certifying institution in the same
manner and under the same terms and conditions as
students and faculty of other postsecondary
institutions located in other foreign countries.
Includes a sense of Congress that limitations on
cooperative efforts by institutions of higher education,
consortia of such institutions, or partnerships between
nonprofit educational organizations and institutions of higher
education with a major strategic partner do not serve the
security, stability, and economic vitality of the United
States.
Explanation of Amendments
The amendment in the nature of a substitute is explained in
the body of this report.
Application of Law to the Legislative Branch
Section 102(b)(3) of Public Law 104-1 requires a
description of the application of this bill to the legislative
branch. H.R. 4795 amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 to
prohibit an institution of higher education that participates
in a nonexpressive commercial boycott of Israel from being
eligible for Title IV funds. H.R. 4795 applies only to
institutions of higher education and therefore does not apply
to the Legislative Branch.
Unfunded Mandate Statement
Pursuant to section 423 of the Congressional Budget and
Impoundment Control Act of 1974, Pub. L. No. 93-44 (as amended
by section 10l(a)(2) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995, Pub. L. No. 104-4), the Committee traditionally adopts as
its own the cost estimate prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) pursuant to section 402 of
the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974.
The Committee reports that because this cost estimate was not
timely submitted to the Committee before the filing of this
report, the Committee is not in a position to make a cost
estimate for H.R. 4795.
Earmark Statement
H.R. 4795 does not contain any congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in
clause 9 of House rule XXI.
Roll Call Votes
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires the Committee Report to include for
each record vote on a motion to report the measure or matter
and on any amendments offered to the measure or matter the
total number of votes for and against and the names of the
Members voting for and against.
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives
In accordance with clause (3)(c) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the goal of H.R. 4795 is to
amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to prohibit an
institution that participates in a nonexpressive commercial
boycott of Israel from being eligible for certain funds under
that Act, and to require an institution that participates in
certain programs under that Act to certify that students are
not unreasonably obstructed from participating in academic
programs in Israel.
Duplication of Federal Programs
No provision of H.R. 4795 establishes or reauthorizes a
program of the Federal Government known to be duplicative of
another Federal program, a program that was included in any
report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress
pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139, or a program
related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of
Federal Domestic Assistance.
Statement of Oversight Findings and Recommendations of the Committee
In compliance with clause 3(c)(l) of rule XIII and clause
2(b)(l) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives,
the Committee's oversight findings and recommendations are
reflected in the body of this report.
Required Committee Hearing
In compliance with clause 3(c)(6) of rule XIII the
following hearing held during the 119th Congress was used to
develop or consider H.R. 4795: On July 15, 2025, the Committee
held a hearing titled ``Antisemitism in Higher Education:
Examining the Role of Faculty, Funding, and Ideology.''
New Budget Authority and CBO Cost Estimate
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, and with
respect to requirements of clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the
Rules of the House of Representatives and section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, a cost estimate was not made
available to the Committee in time for the filing of this
report. The Chairman of the Committee shall cause such estimate
to be printed in the Congressional Record upon its receipt by
the Committee.
Committee Cost Estimate
Clause 3(d)(l) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison of the
costs that would be incurred in carrying out H.R. 4795.
However, clause 3(d)(2)(B) of that rule provides that this
requirement does not apply when, as with the present report,
the Committee has requested a cost estimate for the bill from
the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (new matter is
printed in italics and existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):
HIGHER EDUCATION ACT OF 1965
* * * * * * *
TITLE IV--STUDENT ASSISTANCE
* * * * * * *
Part G--General Provisions Relating to Student Assistance Programs
* * * * * * *
SEC. 487. PROGRAM PARTICIPATION AGREEMENTS.
(a) Required for Programs of Assistance; Contents.--In
order to be an eligible institution for the purposes of any
program authorized under this title, an institution must be an
institution of higher education or an eligible institution (as
that term is defined for the purpose of that program) and
shall, except with respect to a program under subpart 4 of part
A, enter into a program participation agreement with the
Secretary. The agreement shall condition the initial and
continuing eligibility of an institution to participate in a
program upon compliance with the following requirements:
(1) The institution will use funds received by it for
any program under this title and any interest or other
earnings thereon solely for the purpose specified in
and in accordance with the provision of that program.
(2) The institution shall not charge any student a
fee for processing or handling any application, form,
or data required to determine the student's eligibility
for assistance under this title or the amount of such
assistance.
(3) The institution will establish and maintain such
administrative and fiscal procedures and records as may
be necessary to ensure proper and efficient
administration of funds received from the Secretary or
from students under this title, together with
assurances that the institution will provide, upon
request and in a timely fashion, information relating
to the administrative capability and financial
responsibility of the institution to--
(A) the Secretary;
(B) the appropriate guaranty agency; and
(C) the appropriate accrediting agency or
association.
(4) The institution will comply with the provisions
of subsection (c) of this section and the regulations
prescribed under that subsection, relating to fiscal
eligibility.
(5) The institution will submit reports to the
Secretary and, in the case of an institution
participating in a program under part B or part E, to
holders of loans made to the institution's students
under such parts at such times and containing such
information as the Secretary may reasonably require to
carry out the purpose of this title.
(6) The institution will not provide any student with
any statement or certification to any lender under part
B that qualifies the student for a loan or loans in
excess of the amount that student is eligible to borrow
in accordance with sections 425(a), 428(a)(2), and
428(b)(1) (A) and (B).
(7) The institution will comply with the requirements
of section 485.
(8) In the case of an institution that advertises job
placement rates as a means of attracting students to
enroll in the institution, the institution will make
available to prospective students, at or before the
time of application (A) the most recent available data
concerning employment statistics, education statistics,
and any other information necessary to substantiate the
truthfulness of the advertisements, and (B) relevant
State licensing requirements of the State in which such
institution is located for any job for which the course
of instruction is designed to prepare such prospective
students.
(9) In the case of an institution participating in a
program under part B or D, the institution will inform
all eligible borrowers enrolled in the institution
about the availability and eligibility of such
borrowers for State grant assistance from the State in
which the institution is located, and will inform such
borrowers from another State of the source for further
information concerning such assistance from that State.
(10) The institution certifies that it has in
operation a drug abuse prevention program that is
determined by the institution to be accessible to any
officer, employee, or student at the institution.
(11) In the case of any institution whose students
receive financial assistance pursuant to section
484(d), the institution will make available to such
students a program proven successful in assisting
students in obtaining a certificate of high school
equivalency.
(12) The institution certifies that--
(A) the institution has established a campus
security policy; and
(B) the institution has complied with the
disclosure requirements of section 485(f).
(13) The institution will not deny any form of
Federal financial aid to any student who meets the
eligibility requirements of this title on the grounds
that the student is participating in a program of study
abroad approved for credit by the institution.
(14)(A) The institution, in order to participate as
an eligible institution under part B or D, will develop
a Default Management Plan for approval by the Secretary
as part of its initial application for certification as
an eligible institution and will implement such Plan
for two years thereafter.
(B) Any institution of higher education which changes
ownership and any eligible institution which changes
its status as a parent or subordinate institution
shall, in order to participate as an eligible
institution under part B or D, develop a Default
Management Plan for approval by the Secretary and
implement such Plan for two years after its change of
ownership or status.
(C) This paragraph shall not apply in the case of an
institution in which (i) neither the parent nor the
subordinate institution has a cohort default rate in
excess of 10 percent, and (ii) the new owner of such
parent or subordinate institution does not, and has
not, owned any other institution with a cohort default
rate in excess of 10 percent.
(15) The institution acknowledges the authority of
the Secretary, guaranty agencies, lenders, accrediting
agencies, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, and the
State agencies under subpart 1 of part H to share with
each other any information pertaining to the
institution's eligibility to participate in programs
under this title or any information on fraud and abuse.
(16)(A) The institution will not knowingly employ an
individual in a capacity that involves the
administration of programs under this title, or the
receipt of program funds under this title, who has been
convicted of, or has pled nolo contendere or guilty to,
a crime involving the acquisition, use, or expenditure
of funds under this title, or has been judicially
determined to have committed fraud involving funds
under this title or contract with an institution or
third party servicer that has been terminated under
section 432 involving the acquisition, use, or
expenditure of funds under this title, or who has been
judicially determined to have committed fraud involving
funds under this title.
(B) The institution will not knowingly contract with
or employ any individual, agency, or organization that
has been, or whose officers or employees have been--
(i) convicted of, or pled nolo contendere or
guilty to, a crime involving the acquisition,
use, or expenditure of funds under this title;
or
(ii) judicially determined to have committed
fraud involving funds under this title.
(17) The institution will complete surveys conducted
as a part of the Integrated Postsecondary Education
Data System (IPEDS) or any other Federal postsecondary
institution data collection effort, as designated by
the Secretary, in a timely manner and to the
satisfaction of the Secretary.
(18) The institution will meet the requirements
established pursuant to section 485(g).
(19) The institution will not impose any penalty,
including the assessment of late fees, the denial of
access to classes, libraries, or other institutional
facilities, or the requirement that the student borrow
additional funds, on any student because of the
student's inability to meet his or her financial
obligations to the institution as a result of the
delayed disbursement of the proceeds of a loan made
under this title due to compliance with the provisions
of this title, or delays attributable to the
institution.
(20) The institution will not provide any commission,
bonus, or other incentive payment based directly or
indirectly on success in securing enrollments or
financial aid to any persons or entities engaged in any
student recruiting or admission activities or in making
decisions regarding the award of student financial
assistance, except that this paragraph shall not apply
to the recruitment of foreign students residing in
foreign countries who are not eligible to receive
Federal student assistance.
(21) The institution will meet the requirements
established by the Secretary and accrediting agencies
or associations, and will provide evidence to the
Secretary that the institution has the authority to
operate within a State.
(22) The institution will comply with the refund
policy established pursuant to section 484B.
(23)(A) The institution, if located in a State to
which section 4(b) of the National Voter Registration
Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 1973gg-2(b)) does not apply,
will make a good faith effort to distribute a mail
voter registration form, requested and received from
the State, to each student enrolled in a degree or
certificate program and physically in attendance at the
institution, and to make such forms widely available to
students at the institution.
(B) The institution shall request the forms from the
State 120 days prior to the deadline for registering to
vote within the State. If an institution has not
received a sufficient quantity of forms to fulfill this
section from the State within 60 days prior to the
deadline for registering to vote in the State, the
institution shall not be held liable for not meeting
the requirements of this section during that election
year.
(C) This paragraph shall apply to general and special
elections for Federal office, as defined in section
301(3) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2
U.S.C. 431(3)), and to the elections for Governor or
other chief executive within such State).
(D) The institution shall be considered in compliance
with the requirements of subparagraph (A) for each
student to whom the institution electronically
transmits a message containing a voter registration
form acceptable for use in the State in which the
institution is located, or an Internet address where
such a form can be downloaded, if such information is
in an electronic message devoted exclusively to voter
registration.
(24) In the case of a proprietary institution of
higher education (as defined in section 102(b)), such
institution will derive not less than ten percent of
such institution's revenues from sources other than
Federal funds that are disbursed or delivered to or on
behalf of a student to be used to attend such
institution (referred to in this paragraph and
subsection (d) as ``Federal education assistance
funds''), as calculated in accordance with subsection
(d)(1), or will be subject to the sanctions described
in subsection (d)(2).
(25) in the case of an institution that participates
in a loan program under this title, the institution
will--
(A) develop a code of conduct with respect to
such loans with which the institution's
officers, employees, and agents shall comply,
that--
(i) prohibits a conflict of interest
with the responsibilities of an
officer, employee, or agent of an
institution with respect to such loans;
and
(ii) at a minimum, includes the
provisions described in subsection (e);
(B) publish such code of conduct prominently
on the institution's website; and
(C) administer and enforce such code by, at a
minimum, requiring that all of the
institution's officers, employees, and agents
with responsibilities with respect to such
loans be annually informed of the provisions of
the code of conduct.
(26) The institution will, upon written request,
disclose to the alleged victim of any crime of violence
(as that term is defined in section 16 of title 18,
United States Code), or a nonforcible sex offense, the
report on the results of any disciplinary proceeding
conducted by such institution against a student who is
the alleged perpetrator of such crime or offense with
respect to such crime or offense. If the alleged victim
of such crime or offense is deceased as a result of
such crime or offense, the next of kin of such victim
shall be treated as the alleged victim for purposes of
this paragraph.
(27) in the case of an institution that has entered
into a preferred lender arrangement, the institution
will at least annually compile, maintain, and make
available for students attending the institution, and
the families of such students, a list, in print or
other medium, of the specific lenders for loans made,
insured, or guaranteed under this title or private
education loans that the institution recommends,
promotes, or endorses in accordance with such preferred
lender arrangement. In making such list, the
institution shall comply with the requirements of
subsection (h).
(28)(A) The institution will, upon the request of an
applicant for a private education loan, provide to the
applicant the form required under section 128(e)(3) of
the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1638(e)(3)), and
the information required to complete such form, to the
extent the institution possesses such information.
(B) For purposes of this paragraph, the term
``private education loan'' has the meaning given such
term in section 140 of the Truth in Lending Act.
(29) The institution certifies that the institution--
(A) has developed plans to effectively combat
the unauthorized distribution of copyrighted
material, including through the use of a
variety of technology-based deterrents; and
(B) will, to the extent practicable, offer
alternatives to illegal downloading or peer-to-
peer distribution of intellectual property, as
determined by the institution in consultation
with the chief technology officer or other
designated officer of the institution.
(30)(A) The institution will not engage in a
nonexpressive commercial boycott of a major strategic
partner of the United States.
(B) For purposes of this paragraph:
(i) The term ``major strategic partner''
means, with respect to the United States--
(I) a country described in section 4
of Public Law 113-296; or
(II) an entity licensed or regulated
by, or organized under the laws of,
such a country.
(ii) The term ``nonexpressive commercial
boycott of a major strategic partner''--
(I) means a commercial action
(including engaging in rehearsals to
deal and terminating business
activities)
(aa) is intended to limit
commercial relaitons with a
major strategic partner; and
(bb) is not based on a valid
business reason;
(II) does not include actions
described in regulations issued to
provide for the exceptions described in
section 1773(a)(2) of the Anti-Boycott
Act of 2018 (50 U.S.C. 4842(a)(2)).
(b) Hearings.--(1) An institution that has received written
notice of a final audit or program review determination and
that desires to have such determination reviewed by the
Secretary shall submit to the Secretary a written request for
review not later than 45 days after receipt if notification of
the final audit or program review determination.
(2) The Secretary shall, upon receipt of written notice
under paragraph (1), arrange for a hearing and notify the
institution within 30 days of receipt of such notice the date,
time, and place of such hearing. Such hearing shall take place
not later than 120 days from the date upon which the Secretary
notifies the institution.
(c) Audits; Financial Responsibility; Enforcement of
Standards.--(1) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this
title, the Secretary shall prescribe such regulations as may be
necessary to provide for--
(A)(i) except as provided in clauses (ii) and (iii),
a financial audit of an eligible institution with
regard to the financial condition of the institution in
its entirety, and a compliance audit of such
institution with regard to any funds obtained by it
under this title or obtained from a student or a parent
who has a loan insured or guaranteed by the Secretary
under this title, on at least an annual basis and
covering the period since the most recent audit,
conducted by a qualified, independent organization or
person in accordance with standards established by the
Comptroller General for the audit of governmental
organizations, programs, and functions, and as
prescribed in regulations of the Secretary, the results
of which shall be submitted to the Secretary and shall
be available to cognizant guaranty agencies, eligible
lenders, State agencies, and the appropriate State
agency notifying the Secretary under subpart 1 of part
H, except that the Secretary may modify the
requirements of this clause with respect to
institutions of higher education that are foreign
institutions, and may waive such requirements with
respect to a foreign institution whose students receive
less than $500,000 in loans under this title during the
award year preceding the audit period;
(ii) with regard to an eligible institution which is
audited under chapter 75 of title 31, United States
Code, deeming such audit to satisfy the requirements of
clause (i) for the period covered by such audit; or
(iii) at the discretion of the Secretary, with regard
to an eligible institution (other than an eligible
institution described in section 102(a)(1)(C)) that has
obtained less than $200,000 in funds under this title
during each of the 2 award years that precede the audit
period and submits a letter of credit payable to the
Secretary equal to not less than 1/2 of the annual
potential liabilities of such institution as determined
by the Secretary, deeming an audit conducted every 3
years to satisfy the requirements of clause (i), except
for the award year immediately preceding renewal of the
institution's eligibility under section 498(g);
(B) in matters not governed by specific program
provisions, the establishment of reasonable standards
of financial responsibility and appropriate
institutional capability for the administration by an
eligible institution of a program of student financial
aid under this title, including any matter the
Secretary deems necessary to the sound administration
of the financial aid programs, such as the pertinent
actions of any owner, shareholder, or person exercising
control over an eligible institution;
(C)(i) except as provided in clause (ii), a
compliance audit of a third party servicer (other than
with respect to the servicer's functions as a lender if
such functions are otherwise audited under this part
and such audits meet the requirements of this clause),
with regard to any contract with an eligible
institution, guaranty agency, or lender for
administering or servicing any aspect of the student
assistance programs under this title, at least once
every year and covering the period since the most
recent audit, conducted by a qualified, independent
organization or person in accordance with standards
established by the Comptroller General for the audit of
governmental organizations, programs, and functions,
and as prescribed in regulations of the Secretary, the
results of which shall be submitted to the Secretary;
or
(ii) with regard to a third party servicer that is
audited under chapter 75 of title 31, United States
Code, such audit shall be deemed to satisfy the
requirements of clause (i) for the period covered by
such audit;
(D)(i) a compliance audit of a secondary market with
regard to its transactions involving, and its servicing
and collection of, loans made under this title, at
least once a year and covering the period since the
most recent audit, conducted by a qualified,
independent organization or person in accordance with
standards established by the Comptroller General for
the audit of governmental organizations, programs, and
functions, and as prescribed in regulations of the
Secretary, the results of which shall be submitted to
the Secretary; or
(ii) with regard to a secondary market that is
audited under chapter 75 of title 31, United States
Code, such audit shall be deemed to satisfy the
requirements of clause (i) for the period covered by
the audit;
(E) the establishment, by each eligible institution
under part B responsible for furnishing to the lender
the statement required by section 428(a)(2)(A)(i), of
policies and procedures by which the latest known
address and enrollment status of any student who has
had a loan insured under this part and who has either
formally terminated his enrollment, or failed to
reenroll on at least a half-time basis, at such
institution, shall be furnished either to the holder
(or if unknown, the insurer) of the note, not later
than 60 days after such termination or failure to re-
enroll:
(F) the limitation, suspension, or termination of the
participation in any program under this title of an
eligible institution, or the imposition of a civil
penalty under paragraph (3)(B) whenever the Secretary
has determined, after reasonable notice and opportunity
for hearing, that such institution has violated or
failed to carry out any provision of this title, any
regulation prescribed under this title, or any
applicable special arrangement, agreement, or
limitation, except that no period of suspension under
this section shall exceed 60 days unless the
institution and the Secretary agree to an extension or
unless limitation or termination proceedings are
initiated by the Secretary within that period of time;
(G) an emergency action against an institution, under
which the Secretary shall, effective on the date on
which a notice and statement of the basis of the action
is mailed to the institution (by registered mail,
return receipt requested), withhold funds from the
institution or its students and withdraw the
institution's authority to obligate funds under any
program under this title, if the Secretary--
(i) receives information, determined by the
Secretary to be reliable, that the institution
is violating any provision of this title, any
regulation prescribed under this title, or any
applicable special arrangement, agreement, or
limitation,
(ii) determines that immediate action is
necessary to prevent misuse of Federal funds,
and
(iii) determines that the likelihood of loss
outweighs the importance of the procedures
prescribed under subparagraph (D) for
limitation, suspension, or termination,
except that an emergency action shall not exceed 30
days unless limitation, suspension, or termination
proceedings are initiated by the Secretary against the
institution within that period of time, and except that
the Secretary shall provide the institution an
opportunity to show cause, if it so requests, that the
emergency action is unwarranted;
(H) the limitation, suspension, or termination of the
eligibility of a third party servicer to contract with
any institution to administer any aspect of an
institution's student assistance program under this
title, or the imposition of a civil penalty under
paragraph (3)(B), whenever the Secretary has
determined, after reasonable notice and opportunity for
a hearing, that such organization, acting on behalf of
an institution, has violated or failed to carry out any
provision of this title, any regulation prescribed
under this title, or any applicable special
arrangement, agreement, or limitation, except that no
period of suspension under this subparagraph shall
exceed 60 days unless the organization and the
Secretary agree to an extension, or unless limitation
or termination proceedings are initiated by the
Secretary against the individual or organization within
that period of time; and
(I) an emergency action against a third party
servicer that has contracted with an institution to
administer any aspect of the institution's student
assistance program under this title, under which the
Secretary shall, effective on the date on which a
notice and statement of the basis of the action is
mailed to such individual or organization (by
registered mail, return receipt requested), withhold
funds from the individual or organization and withdraw
the individual or organization's authority to act on
behalf of an institution under any program under this
title, if the Secretary--
(i) receives information, determined by the
Secretary to be reliable, that the individual
or organization, acting on behalf of an
institution, is violating any provision of this
title, any regulation prescribed under this
title, or any applicable special arrangement,
agreement, or limitation,
(ii) determines that immediate action is
necessary to prevent misuse of Federal funds,
and
(iii) determines that the likelihood of loss
outweighs the importance of the procedures
prescribed under subparagraph (F), for
limitation, suspension, or termination,
except that an emergency action shall not exceed 30
days unless the limitation, suspension, or termination
proceedings are initiated by the Secretary against the
individual or organization within that period of time,
and except that the Secretary shall provide the
individual or organization an opportunity to show
cause, if it so requests, that the emergency action is
unwarranted.
(2) if an individual who, or entity that, exercises
substantial control, as determined by the Secretary in
accordance with the definition of substantial control
in subpart 3 of part H, over one or more institutions
participating in any program under this title, or, for
purposes of paragraphs (1) (H) and (I), over one or
more organizations that contract with an institution to
administer any aspect of the institution's student
assistance program under this title, is determined to
have committed one or more violations of the
requirements of any program under this title, or has
been suspended or debarred in accordance with the
regulations of the Secretary, the Secretary may use
such determination, suspension, or debarment as the
basis for imposing an emergency action, on limiting,
suspending, or terminating, in a single proceeding, the
participation of any or all institutions under the
substantial control of that individual or entity.
(3)(A) Upon determination, after reasonable notice
and opportunity for a hearing, that an eligible
institution has engaged in substantial
misrepresentation of the nature of its educational
program, its financial charges, or the employability of
its graduates, the Secretary may suspend or terminate
the eligibility status for any or all programs under
this title of any otherwise eligible institution, in
accordance with procedures specified in paragraph
(1)(D) of this subsection, until the Secretary finds
that such practices have been corrected.
(B)(i) Upon determination, after reasonable notice
and opportunity for a hearing, that an eligible
institution--
(I) has violated or failed to carry out any
provision of this title or any regulation
prescribed under this title; or
(II) has engaged in substantial
misrepresentation of the nature of its
educational program, its financial charges, and
the employability of its graduates,
the Secretary may impose a civil penalty upon such
institution of not to exceed $25,000 for each violation
or misrepresentation.
(ii) Any civil penalty may be compromised by the
Secretary. In determining the amount of such penalty,
or the amount agreed upon in compromise, the
appropriateness of the penalty to the size of the
institution of higher education subject to the
determination, and the gravity of the violation,
failure, or misrepresentation shall be considered. The
amount of such penalty, when finally determined, or the
amount agreed upon in compromise, may be deducted from
any sums owing by the United States to the institution
charged.
(4) The Secretary shall publish a list of State
agencies which the Secretary determines to be reliable
authority as to the quality of public postsecondary
vocational education in their respective States for the
purpose of determining eligibility for all Federal
student assistance programs.
(5) The Secretary shall make readily available to
appropriate guaranty agencies, eligible lenders, state
agencies notifying the Secretary under subpart 1 of
part H, and accrediting agencies or associations the
results of the audits of eligible institutions
conducted pursuant to paragraph (1)(A).
(6) The Secretary is authorized to provide any
information collected as a result of audits conducted
under this section, together with audit information
collected by guaranty agencies, to any Federal or State
agency having responsibilities with respect to student
financial assistance, including those referred to in
subsection (a)(15) of this section.
(7) Effective with respect to any audit conducted
under this subsection after December 31, 1988, if, in
the course of conducting any such audit, the personnel
of the Department of Education discover, or are
informed of, grants or other assistance provided by an
institution in accordance with this title for which the
institution has not received funds appropriated under
this title (in the amount necessary to provide such
assistance), including funds for which reimbursement
was not requested prior to such discovery or
information, such institution shall be permitted to
offset that amount against any sums determined to be
owed by the institution pursuant to such audit, or to
receive reimbursement for that amount (if the
institution does not owe any such sums).
(d) Implementation of Non-Federal Revenue Requirement.--
(1) Calculation.--In making calculations under
subsection (a)(24), a proprietary institution of higher
education shall--
(A) use the cash basis of accounting, except
in the case of loans described in subparagraph
(D)(i) that are made by the proprietary
institution of higher education;
(B) consider as revenue only those funds
generated by the institution from--
(i) tuition, fees, and other
institutional charges for students
enrolled in programs eligible for
assistance under this title:
(ii) activities conducted by the
institution that are necessary for the
education and training of the
institution's students. if such
activities are--
(I) conducted on campus or at
a facility under the control of
the institution:
(II) performed under the
supervision of a member of the
institution's faculty; and
(III) required to be
performed by all students in a
specific educational program at
the institution:
(iii) funds paid by a student, or on
behalf of a student by a party other
than the institution, for an education
or training program that is not
eligible for funds under this title, if
the program--
(I) is approved or licensed
by the appropriate State
agency;
(II) is accredited by an
accrediting agency recognized
by the Secretary; or
(III) provides an industry-
recognized credential or
certification;
(C) presume that any Federal education
assistance funds that are disbursed or
delivered to or on behalf of a student will be
used to pay the student's tuition, fees, or
other institutional charges, regardless of
whether the institution credits those funds to
the student's account or pays those funds
directly to the student, except to the extent
that the student's tuition, fees, or other
institutional charges are satisfied by--
(i) grant funds provided by non-
Federal public agencies or private
sources independent of the institution;
(ii) funds provided under a
contractual arrangement with a Federal,
State, or local government agency for
the purpose of providing job training
to low-income individuals who are in
need of that training;
(iii) funds used by a student from
savings plans for educational expenses
established by or on behalf of the
student and which qualify for special
tax treatment under the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986: or
(iv) institutional scholarships
described in subparagraph (D)(iii);
(D) include institutional aid as revenue to
the school only as follows:
(i) in the case of loans made by a
proprietary institution of higher
education on or after July 1, 2008, and
prior to July 1, 2012, the net present
value of such loans made by the
institution during the applicable
institutional fiscal year accounted for
on an accrual basis and estimated in
accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles and related
standards and guidance, if the loans--
(I) are bona fide as
evidenced by enforceable
promissory notes;
(II) are issued at intervals
related to the institution's
enrollment periods; and
(III) are subject to regular
loan repayments and
collections;
(ii) in the case of loans made by a
proprietary institution of higher
education on or after July 1, 2012,
only the amount of loan repayments
received during the applicable
institutional fiscal year, excluding
repayments on loans made and accounted
for as specified in clause (i); and
(iii) in the case of scholarships
provided by a proprietary institution
of higher education, only those
scholarships provided by the
institution in the form of monetary aid
or tuition discounts based upon the
academic achievements or financial need
of students, disbursed during each
fiscal year from an established
restricted account, and only to the
extent that funds in that account
represent designated funds from an
outside source or from income earned on
those funds;
(E) in the case of each student who receives
a loan on or after July 1, 2008, and prior to
July 1, 2011, that is authorized under section
428H or that is a Federal Direct Unsubsidized
Stafford Loan, treat as revenue received by the
institution from sources other than funds
received under this title, the amount by which
the disbursement of such loan received by the
institution exceeds the limit on such loan in
effect on the day before the date of enactment
of the Ensuring Continued Access to Student
Loans Act of 2008; and
(F) exclude from revenues--
(i) the amount of funds the
institution received under part C,
unless the institution used those funds
to pay a student's institutional
charges;
(ii) the amount of funds the
institution received under subpart 4 of
part A;
(iii) the amount of funds provided by
the institution as matching funds for a
program under this title;
(iv) the amount of funds provided by
the institution for a program under
this title that are required to be
refunded or returned; and
(v) the amount charged for books,
supplies, and equipment, unless the
institution includes that amount as
tuition, fees, or other institutional
charges.
(2) Sanctions.--
(A) Ineligibility.--A proprietary institution
of higher education that fails to meet a
requirement of subsection (a)(24) for two
consecutive institutional fiscal years shall be
ineligible to participate in the programs
authorized by this title for a period of not
less than two institutional fiscal years. To
regain eligibility to participate in the
programs authorized by this title, a
proprietary institution of higher education
shall demonstrate compliance with all
eligibility and certification requirements
under section 498 for a minimum of two
institutional fiscal years after the
institutional fiscal year in which the
institution became ineligible.
(B) Additional enforcement.--In addition to
such other means of enforcing the requirements
of this title as may be available to the
Secretary, if a proprietary institution of
higher education fails to meet a requirement of
subsection (a)(24) for any institutional fiscal
year, then the institution's eligibility to
participate in the programs authorized by this
title becomes provisional for the two
institutional fiscal years after the
institutional fiscal year in which the
institution failed to meet the requirement of
subsection (a)(24), except that such
provisional eligibility shall terminate--
(i) on the expiration date of the
institution's program participation
agreement under this subsection that is
in effect on the date the Secretary
determines that the institution failed
to meet the requirement of subsection
(a)(24); or
(ii) in the case that the Secretary
determines that the institution failed
to meet a requirement of subsection
(a)(24) for two consecutive
institutional fiscal years, on the date
the institution is determined
ineligible in accordance with
subparagraph (A).
(3) Publication on college navigator website.--The
Secretary shall publicly disclose on the College
Navigator website--
(A) the identity of any proprietary
institution of higher education that fails to
meet a requirement of subsection (a)(24); and
(B) the extent to which the institution
failed to meet such requirement.
(4) Report to congress.--Not later than July 1, 2009,
and July 1 of each succeeding year, the Secretary shall
submit to the authorizing committees a report that
contains, for each proprietary institution of higher
education that receives assistance under this title, as
provided in the audited financial statements submitted
to the Secretary by each institution pursuant to the
requirements of subsection (a)(24)--
(A) the amount and percentage of such
institution's revenues received from sources
under this title; and
(B) the amount and percentage of such
institution's revenues received from other
sources.
(e) Code of Conduct Requirements.--An institution of higher
education's code of conduct, as required under subsection
(a)(25), shall include the following requirements:
(1) Ban on revenue-sharing arrangements.--
(A) Prohibition.--The institution shall not
enter into any revenue-sharing arrangement with
any lender.
(B) Definition.--For purposes of this
paragraph, the term ``revenue-sharing
arrangement'' means an arrangement between an
institution and a lender under which--
(i) a lender provides or issues a
loan that is made, insured, or
guaranteed under this title to students
attending the institution or to the
families of such students; and
(ii) the institution recommends the
lender or the loan products of the
lender and in exchange, the lender pays
a fee or provides other material
benefits, including revenue or profit
sharing, to the institution, an officer
or employee of the institution, or an
agent.
(2) Gift ban.--
(A) Prohibition.--No officer or employee of
the institution who is employed in the
financial aid office of the institution or who
otherwise has responsibilities with respect to
education loans, or agent who has
responsibilities with respect to education
loans, shall solicit or accept any gift from a
lender, guarantor, or servicer of education
loans.
(B) Definition of gift.--
(i) In general.--In this paragraph,
the term ``gift'' means any gratuity,
favor, discount, entertainment,
hospitality, loan, or other item having
a monetary value of more than a de
minimus amount. The term includes a
gift of services, transportation,
lodging, or meals, whether provided in
kind, by purchase of a ticket, payment
in advance, or reimbursement after the
expense has been incurred.
(ii) Exceptions.--The term ``gift''
shall not include any of the following:
(I) Standard material,
activities, or programs on
issues related to a loan,
default aversion, default
prevention, or financial
literacy, such as a brochure, a
workshop, or training.
(II) Food, refreshments,
training, or informational
material furnished to an
officer or employee of an
institution, or to an agent, as
an integral part of a training
session that is designed to
improve the service of a
lender, guarantor, or servicer
of education loans to the
institution, if such training
contributes to the professional
development of the officer,
employee, or agent.
(III) Favorable terms,
conditions, and borrower
benefits on an education loan
provided to a student employed
by the institution if such
terms, conditions, or benefits
are comparable to those
provided to all students of the
institution.
(IV) Entrance and exit
counseling services provided to
borrowers to meet the
institution's responsibilities
for entrance and exit
counseling as required by
subsections (b) and (l) of
section 485, as long as--
(aa) the
institution's staff are
in control of the
counseling, (whether in
person or via
electronic
capabilities); and
(bb) such counseling
does not promote the
products or services of
any specific lender.
(V) Philanthropic
contributions to an institution
from a lender, service, or
guarantor of education loans
that are unrelated to education
loans or any contribution from
any lender, guarantor, or
servicer that is not made in
exchange for any advantage
related to education loans.
(VI) State education grants,
scholarships, or financial aid
funds administered by or on
behalf of a State.
(iii) Rule for gifts to family
members.--For purposes of this
paragraph, a gift to a family member of
an officer or employee of an
institution, to a family member of an
agent, or to any other individual based
on that individual's relationship with
the officer, employee, or agent, shall
be considered a gift to the officer,
employee, or agent if--
(I) the gift is given with
the knowledge and acquiescence
of the officer, employee, or
agent; and
(II) the officer, employee,
or agent has reason to believe
the gift was given because of
the official position of the
officer, employee, or agent.
(3) Contracting arrangements prohibited.--
(A) Prohibition.--An officer or employee who
is employed in the financial aid office of the
institution or who otherwise has
responsibilities with respect to education
loans, or an agent who has responsibilities
with respect to education loans, shall not
accept from any lender or affiliate of any
lender any fee, payment, or other financial
benefit (including the opportunity to purchase
stock) as compensation for any type of
consulting arrangement or other contract to
provide services to a lender or on behalf of a
lender relating to education loans.
(B) Exceptions.--Nothing in this subsection
shall be construed as prohibiting--
(i) an officer or employee of an
institution who is not employed in the
institution's financial aid office and
who does not otherwise have
responsibilities with respect to
education loans, or an agent who does
not have responsibilities with respect
to education loans, from performing
paid or unpaid service on a board of
directors of a lender, guarantor, or
servicer of education loans;
(ii) an officer or employee of the
institution who is not employed in the
institution's financial aid office but
who has responsibility with respect to
education loans as a result of a
position held at the institution, or an
agent who has responsibility with
respect to education loans, from
performing paid or unpaid service on a
board of directors of a lender,
guarantor, or servicer of education
loans, if the institution has a written
conflict of interest policy that
clearly sets forth that officers,
employees, or agents must recuse
themselves from participating in any
decision of the board regarding
education loans at the institution; or
(iii) an officer, employee, or
contractor of a lender, guarantor, or
servicer of education loans from
serving on a board of directors, or
serving as a trustee, of an
institution, if the institution has a
written conflict of interest policy
that the board member or trustee must
recuse themselves from any decision
regarding education loans at the
institution.
(4) Interaction with borrowers.--The institution
shall not--
(A) for any first-time borrower, assign,
through award packaging or other methods, the
borrower's loan to a particular lender; or
(B) refuse to certify, or delay certification
of, any loan based on the borrower's selection
of a particular lender or guaranty agency.
(5) Prohibition on offers of funds for private
loans.--
(A) Prohibition.--The institution shall not
request or accept from any lender any offer of
funds to be used for private education loans
(as defined in section 140 of the Truth in
Lending Act), including funds for an
opportunity pool loan, to students in exchange
for the institution providing concessions or
promises regarding providing the lender with--
(i) a specified number of loans made,
insured, or guaranteed under this
title;
(ii) a specified loan volume of such
loans; or
(iii) a preferred lender arrangement
for such loans
(B) Definition of opportunity pool loan.--In
this paragraph, the term ``opportunity pool
loan'' means a private education loan made by a
lender to a student attending the institution
or the family member of such a student that
involves a payment, directly or indirectly, by
such institution of points, premiums,
additional interest; or financial support to
such lender for the purpose of such lender
extending credit to the student or the family.
(6) Ban on staffing assistance.--
(A) Prohibition.--The institution shall not
request or accept from any lender any
assistance with call center staffing or
financial aid office staffing.
(B) Certain assistance permitted.--Nothing in
paragraph (1) shall be construed to prohibit
the institution from requesting or accepting
assistance from a lender related to:
(i) professional development training
for financial aid administrators;
(ii) providing educational counseling
materials, financial literacy
materials, or debt management materials
to borrowers, provided that such
materials disclose to borrowers the
identification of any lender that
assisted in preparing or providing such
materials; or
(iii) staffing services on a short-
term, nonrecurring basis to assist the
institution with financial aid-related
functions during emergencies, including
State-declared or federally declared
natural disasters, federally declared
national disasters, and other localized
disasters and emergencies identified by
the Secretary.
(7) Advisory board compensation.--Any employee who is
employed in the financial aid office of the
institution, or who otherwise has responsibilities with
respect to education loans or other student financial
aid of the institution, and who serves on an advisory
board, commission, or group established by a lender,
guarantor, or group of lenders or guarantors, shall be
prohibited from receiving anything of value from the
lender, guarantor, or group of lenders or guarantors,
except that the employee may be reimbursed for
reasonable expenses incurred in serving on such
advisory board, commission, or group.
(f) Institutional Requirements for Teach-Outs.--
(1) In general.--In the event the Secretary initiates
the limitation, suspension, or terrnination of the
participation of an institution of higher education in
any program under this title under the authority of
subsection (c)(1)(F) or initiates an emergency action
under the authority of subsection (c)(1)(G) and its
prescribed regulations, the Secretary shall require
that institution to prepare a teach-out plan for
submission to the institution's accrediting agency or
association in compliance with section 496(c)(3), the
Secretary's regulations on teach-out plans, and the
standards of the institution's accrediting agency or
association.
(2) Teach-out plan defined.--In this subsection, the
term ``teach-out plan'' means a written plan that
provides for the equitable treatment of students if an
institution of higher education ceases to operate
before all students have completed their program of
study, and may include, if required by the
institution's accrediting agency or association, an
agreement between institutions for such a teach-out
plan.
(g) Inspector General Report on Gift Ban Violations.--The
Inspector General of the Department shall--
(1) submit an annual report to the authorizing
committees identifying all violations of an
institution's code of conduct that the Inspector
General has substantiated during the preceding year
relating to the gift ban provisions described in
subsection (e)(2); and
(2) make the report available to the public through
the Department's website.
(h) Preferred Lender List Requirements.--
(1) In general.--In compiling, maintaining, and
making available a preferred lender list as required
under subsection (a)(27), the institution will--
(A) clearly and fully disclose on such
preferred lender list--
(i) not less than the information
required to be disclosed under section
153(a)(2)(A);
(ii) why the institution has entered
into a preferred lender arrangement
with each lender on the preferred
lender list, particularly with respect
to terms and conditions or provisions
favorable to the borrower; and
(iii) that the students attending the
institution, or the families of such
students, do not have to borrow from a
lender on the preferred lender list;
(B) ensure, through the use of the list of
lender affiliates provided by the Secretary
under paragraph (2), that--
(i) there are not less than three
lenders of loans made under part B that
are not affiliates of each other
included on the preferred lender list
and, if the institution recommends,
promotes, or endorses private education
loans, there are not less than two
lenders of private education loans that
are not affiliates of each other
included on the preferred lender list;
and
(ii) the preferred lender list under
this paragraph--
(I) specifically indicates,
for each listed lender, whether
the lender is or is not an
affiliate of each other lender
on the preferred lender list;
and
(II) if a lender is an
affiliate of another lender on
the preferred lender list,
describes the details of such
affiliation;
(C) prominently disclose the method and
criteria used by the institution in selecting
lenders with which to enter into preferred
lender arrangements to ensure that such lenders
are selected on the basis of the best interests
of the borrowers, including--
(i) payment of origination or other
fees on behalf of the borrower;
(ii) highly competitive interest
rates, or other terms and conditions or
provisions of loans under this title or
private education loans;
(iii) high-quality servicing for such
loans; or
(iv) additional benefits beyond the
standard terms and conditions or
provisions for such loans;
(D) exercise a duty of care and a duty of
loyalty to compile the preferred lender list
under this paragraph without prejudice and for
the sole benefit of the students attending the
institution, or the families of such students;
(E) not deny or otherwise impede the
borrower's choice of a lender or cause
unnecessary delay in loan certification under
this title for those borrowers who choose a
lender that is not included on the preferred
lender list; and
(F) comply with such other requirements as
the Secretary may prescribe by regulation.
(2) Lender affiliates list.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary shall maintain
and regularly update a list of lender
affiliates of all eligible lenders, and shall
provide such list to institutions for use in
carrying out paragraph (1)(B).
(B) Use of most recent list.--An institution
shall use the most recent list of lender
affiliates provided by the Secretary under
subparagraph (A) in carrying out paragraph
(1)(B).
(i) Definitions.--For the purpose of this section:
(1) Agent.--The term ``agent'' has the meaning given
the term in section 151.
(2) Affiliate.--The term ``affiliate'' means a person
that controls, is controlled by, or is under common
control with another person. A person controls, is
controlled by, or is under common control with another
person if--
(A) the person directly or indirectly, or
acting through one or more others, owns,
controls, or has the power to vote five percent
or more of any class of voting securities of
such other person;
(B) the person controls, in any manner, the
election of a majority of the directors or
trustees of such other person; or
(C) the Secretary determines (after notice
and opportunity for a hearing) that the person
directly or indirectly exercises a controlling
interest over the management or policies of
such other person's education loans.
(3) Education loan.--The term ``education loan'' has
the meaning given the term in section 151.
(4) Eligible institution.--The term ``eligible
institution'' means any such institution described in
section 102 of this Act.
(5) Officer.--The term ``officer'' has the meaning
given the term in section 151.
(6) Preferred lender arrangement.--The term
``preferred lender arrangement'' has the meaning given
the term in section 151.
(j) Construction.--Nothing in the amendments made by the
Higher Education Amendments of 1992 shall be construed to
prohibit an institution from recording, at the cost of the
institution, a hearing referred to in subsection (b)(2),
subsection (c)(1)(D), or subparagraph (A) or (B)(i) of
subsection (c)(2), of this section to create a record of the
hearing, except the unavailability of a recording shall not
serve to delay the completion of the proceeding. The Secretary
shall allow the institution to use any reasonable means,
including stenographers, of recording the hearing.
* * * * * * *
TITLE VI--INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS
* * * * * * *
PART D--GENERAL PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
SEC. 639. INSTITUTIONAL CERTIFICATIONS.
(a) Annual Requirement for Institutional Eligibility.--Not
later than July 31 of each calendar year beginning on or after
the date of enactment of the Protect Economic and Academic
Freedom Act of 2026, an institution of higher education
participating or applying to participate in any program under
this title shall submit to the Secretary the certification
required under subsection (b). An institution that does not
submit such certification by July 31 of a calendar year shall
be ineligible to receive any funds under this title in the
first fiscal year that begins after such July 31, including any
funds under this title that would otherwise have been available
to the institution in such fiscal year for a grant awarded
during a previous fiscal year.
(b) Certification.--An institution shall certify to the
Secretary that, for the period beginning on the date of such
certification and ending on July 31 of the following year, the
institution will--
(1) permit students and faculty of the certifying
institution to participate in academic programs,
including conferences, teaching exchanges, cultural
exchanges, study abroad programs, joint research, and
other collaborative educational activities, in a major
strategic partner (as defined in section 487(a)(30)) of
the United States in the same manner, and under the
same terms and conditions, as students and faculty of
the institution are permitted to participate in
academic programs in other foreign countries; and
(2) permit students and faculty of postsecondary
educational institutions in such a major strategic
partner to participate in academic programs offered by
the certifying institution, including conferences,
teaching exchanges, cultural exchanges, study abroad
programs, joint research, and other collaborative
educational activities, in the same manner, and under
the same terms and conditions, as students and faculty
of other foreign postsecondary educational institutions
that are not in such a major strategic partner.
SEC. 639A SENSE OF CONGRESS.
It is the sense of Congress that limitations on cooperative
efforts by institutions of higher education, consortia of such
institutions, or partnerships between nonprofit educational
organizations and institutions of higher education with a major
strategic partner (as defined in section 487(a)(30)) of the
United States do not serve the security, stability, and
economic vitality of the United States.
* * * * * * *
MINORITY VIEWS
INTRODUCTION
H.R. 4795, the Protect Economic and Academic Freedom Act of
2025, sponsored by Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) amends the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (HEA) to make institutions of higher
education (IHEs) ineligible for participation in any programs
authorized under HEA title IV (Title IV) if they engage in a
``nonexpressive commercial boycott'' of Israel.\1\ The bill
also makes IHEs ineligible for participation in any programs
under HEA title VI if they do not permit their students and
faculty to participate in foreign exchange programs with
Israel, or permit Israeli students and academics to participate
in their academic programs and exchanges.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\H.R. 4795 Sec. 2, 119th Cong. (2025).
\2\H.R. 4795 Sec. 3, 119th Cong. (2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although the legislative text does not mention it by name,
Rep. Foxx said at the bill's introduction that it was aimed at
the official Boycott-Divest-Sanctions (BDS) movement\3\ No IHE
in the United States has expressed administrative support for
the BDS movement, making the first half of this bill a solution
in search of a problem. Further the solution it proposes may
violate long established principles regarding Congressional
power under the Spending Clause and First Amendment activity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\Press Release, Rep. Virginia Foxx, Foxx, Gottheimer Introduce
Bill to Hold Higher Education Accountable for BDS Activity (July 30,
2025), https://foxx.house.gov/news/
documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=400167 (``[The legislation] prohibits
colleges and universities from receiving federal student aid if they
engage in commercial and academic boycotts dictated by those in the
boycott-sanction-divest (BDS) movement.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even though the BDS movement in America has little to no
institutional momentum behind it, there are increasing
instances of faculty members, student and faculty groups, and
scholarly associations taking stances to limit engagement with
students, faculty, and academics in Israel in response to the
war in Gaza.\4\ H.R. 4795 makes the receipt of HEA title VI
funds--funds designed to support international higher
education--contingent on schools having open dialogue with
students and faculty across the world. Requiring IHEs to
certify they will not impede the ability of students and
faculty to engage in academic programs, cultural exchanges,
etc. with Israeli students and faculty is a policy rationally
related to the underlying use of these funds. This could have
been the building block for a bipartisan unanimous bill, but
the Majority decided to include in the bill a section on the
BDS movement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\See e.g., Elisabeth Bumiller, Israeli Academics Find Themselves
Isolated Despite Gaza Cease-Fire, NY Times (Nov. 9, 2025), https://
www.nytimes.com/2025/11/09/world/middleeast/boycotts-israel.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE BDS MOVEMENT IS EXPRESSIVE ACTIVITY IMPLICATED BY THE FIRST
AMENDMENT
BDS is a trans-national political movement and committee
founded in 2005 to exert pressure on Israel to change its
policies in regard to Palestinians.\5\ Specifically, BDS has
called for ``[e]nding [Israel's] occupation and colonization of
all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall; recognizing the
fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel
to full equality; and respecting, protecting and promoting the
rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and
properties as stipulated in UN Resolution 194.''\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\Palestinian BDS National Committee, What it BDS?, (last visited
Aug. 1, 2026), https://bdsmovement.net/what-bds.
\6\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As opposed to a traditional boycott of a company, BDS'
boycott discipline includes, ``withdrawing support from
Israel's apartheid regime, complicit Israeli sporting,
cultural, and academic institutions, and all Israeli and
international companies engaged in violations of Palestinian
human rights.''\7\ Many mainstream Jewish groups do not support
the aims of BDS and equate such efforts with calling for the
destruction of Israel. Some Jewish groups have denounced the
aims of BDS but also recognized that BDS supporters have the
constitutional right to espouse their views and anti-BDS laws
are counter to the First Amendment.\8\ It is worth noting that
the BDS movement, which has support among a few IHEs in other
countries, has never gained traction at American universities.
While there have been faculty senates and student assemblies
that have passed resolutions in support of BDS, those
resolutions are non-binding on the institutions of higher
education. These votes are often immediately followed by
statements from administrators that the institution has no plan
to boycott, divest, or sanction anything related to Israel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\Id.
\8\J Street, J Street policy principles on the Global BDS Movement
and boycotts, divestment and sanctions efforts, (last visited Aug. 1,
2026), https://jstreet.org/boycott-divestment-and-sanctions-bds/ (``J
Street is opposed to federal and state-level legislation that would
criminalize individuals' and non-governmental organizations' BDS
activities, penalize BDS supporters or impose BDS-related litmus tests
on individuals. This type of misguided legislative overreach is the
wrong way to fight BDS. By alienating and angering the liberal
audiences that BDS seeks to engage and recruit, it actually empowers
the BDS Movement. This legislation can too easily violate
constitutional free speech protections, and is fundamentally
inconsistent with our democratic principles as Americans and as Jews.
We urge lawmakers and Jewish communal leaders to engage Americans who
are sympathetic to BDS in serious and open conversation and debate,
rather than seeking to silence them by aggressively penalizing their
actions and positions.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Despite the lack of IHE administration support for BDS,
approximately 38 states legislatures--mostly conservative--have
passed laws opposing BDS efforts. This is the appropriate
context in which to consider H.R. 4795. Under this bill, IHEs
would have to certify as part of the program participation
agreement (PPA) they are required to enter into to receive
Title IV aid, that they ``will not engage in a nonexpressive
commercial boycott of a major strategic partner of the United
States.''\9\ This language mirrors that of many state laws.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\H.R. 4795 Sec. 2, 119th Cong. (2025).
\10\E.g., Martin v. Wrigley, 540 F. Supp. 3d 1220, 1229 (N.D. Ga.
2021) (``Like the decisions reviewing anti-boycotting statutes in
Jordahl, Amawi, Koontz, and Waldrip, this Court concludes that O.C.G.A.
Sec. 50-5-85 imposes a condition on those who contract with the state
of Georgia that implicates the contractors' First Amendment rights.);
but see Arkansas Times LP v. Waldrip as Tr. of Univ. of Arkansas Bd. of
Trs., 37 F.4th 1386, 1394 (8th Cir. 2022) (``Under Arkansas's canons of
statutory interpretation, we think the Arkansas Supreme Court would
read Act 710 as prohibiting purely commercial, non-expressive conduct.
It does not ban Arkansas Times from publicly criticizing Israel, or
even protesting the statute itself. It only prohibits economic
decisions that discriminate against Israel. Because those commercial
decisions are invisible to observers unless explained, they are not
inherently expressive and do not implicate the First Amendment.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The problem with H.R. 4795, and by extension many of the
state laws aimed at BDS, is that they are attempting to use
power derived from the Spending Clause of the Constitution to
police First Amendment-protected speech. H.R. 4795 claims its
target is ``nonexpressive'' activity, and as such it does not
impact First Amendment speech. But the sponsors continuously
reiterate their policy target is the BDS movement, a movement
which is clear and open about the ideas it hopes to express via
a boycott of Israel. It is clear that the boycott envisioned by
BDS, is an expressive activity, one designed to express a
political opinion and compel political activity. H.R. 4795 just
calling it ``nonexpressive'' is a fig leaf courts will likely
ignore, recognizing the bill implicates free speech. Congress
cannot make a law abridging the freedom of speech, either
directly, or in this case indirectly.
Further, H.R. 4795 would likely fail the ``unconstitutional
conditions'' doctrine, an established principle in case law
that ``once the government has established a benefit, it may
not deny that benefit to a person `on a basis that infringes
his constitutionally protected interests.'''\11\ It is clear
that under H.R. 4795, Congress would be attempting to force
IHEs to adopt a particular view on an issue of public concern.
And as Title IV's purpose as federal student aid has little to
no nexus with the issue at hand, it is likely Courts will apply
``heightened scrutiny to conditions that `seek to leverage
funding' in a way that burdens constitutional rights `outside
the contours of the program itself.'''\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\Victoria L. Killion, Cong. Rsch. Serv., R46827, Funding
Conditions: Constitutional Limits on Congress's Spending Power (2021),
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46827.
\12\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE VI FUNDING SHOULD NOT FLOW TO SCHOOLS THAT HAMPER INTERNATIONAL
COOPERATION
The second provision of H.R. 4795 would require schools
that apply for funding under HEA title VI to certify that they
permit their students and faculty to engage with students and
faculty of Israeli institutions of higher education.\13\ The
Congressional Research Service (CRS) broadly describes the
purpose of the programs authorized under title VI as ``to
develop Americans'' ability to understand and interact with
people from other societies, to improve diplomacy and global
cooperation, and to help U.S. companies compete in
international business.''\14\ These goals, unlike those of HEA
Title IV, are directly related to the underlying requirement
H.R. 4795 seeks to impose. It is wholly reasonable that IHEs
that are applying for funding to further student's
understanding of international cooperation would be expected
not to sanction the boycotting of any nation. Such a condition
on Title VI funds is constitutional, and many Committee
Democrats support this provision, but could not support a bill
that also included the broader Title IV conditioning discussed
previously.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\H.R. 4795 Sec. 3, 119th Cong. (2025).
\14\https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/R/PDF/R46508/
R46508.1.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEMOCRATIC AMENDMENTS OFFERED DURING MARKUP OF H.R. 4795
Committee Democrats did not offer any amendments during
consideration of H.R. 4795.
CONCLUSION
As mentioned earlier, to the extent that H.R. 4795 is aimed
at the BDS movement in the United States, it is a solution in
search of a problem. The BDS movement predates the Oct. 7, 2023
attack on Israel, and while it may have limited student and
faculty support it has never been endorsed by the
administration of any domestic university. Regardless, the
Majority can bring up bills like H.R. 4795 recognizing that
movements that have to rely on the First Amendment to protect
their right to speak are never popular. Further, they can take
a policy that many members may agree with, requiring that
schools that receive HEA funding for international education be
open to international dialogue, and hold it hostage in an
attempt to get members to support other policy they oppose.
While they are well within their rights, this is not productive
lawmaking, and does nothing to stem animus and division on
college campuses or help students feel safe.
[all]