PSJD News Digest – October 10, 2025

October 10, 2025 at 1:39 pm · Filed under Public Interest Law News Bulletin

Sam Halpert, NALP Director of Public Service Initiatives

Photo: Harris and Ewing Collection, Library of Congress

Hi Interested Public,

I wasn’t able to wade through last week’s news by the end of it, so you’re getting two weeks at once this week. But I’m splitting them up to make things easier to track. This digest covers news from this week, but you can find last week’s news digested for you here. I’ve highlighted several stories in the lede section, but lots of other important events are covered in the links below, including major stories related to student loans, federal restructuring, and the ongoing federal shutdown.

Solidarity,

Sam

Editor’s Choice(s)

  • Trump administration begins layoffs of federal workers amid government shutdown (NBC; 10 Oct 25)

    “The Trump administration began laying off federal workers on Friday, the 10th day of the U.S. government shutdown, administration budget chief Russell Vought said in a social media post…The Office of Management and Budget, which Vought leads, soon after confirmed that "RIFs have begun and are substantial."”

  • Trump’s war on the left: Inside the plan to investigate liberal groups (Reuters; 9 Oct 25)

    “The Trump administration plans to deploy America's counter-terrorism apparatus – including the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security and the Justice Department – as well as the Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Department against certain left-wing groups it accuses of funding and organizing political violence, the officials said.”

    • Trump’s Orders Targeting Antifascism Aim to Criminalize Opposition (Brennan Center; 9 Oct 25)

      “In late September, President Trump signed an executive order purporting to designate “Antifa” as a “domestic terrorist organization.” A few days later, he issued National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 (NSPM-7) on Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence. This analysis evaluates the claims made in these documents and their potential damaging effects, drawing on the Brennan Center’s decade of work on the government’s framework for responding to terrorism, both foreign and domestic.”

    • Turning Powerful Post 9-11 Counterterrorism Tools Onto Domestic Policy Targets (Arnold & Porter; 26 Sep 25)

      “NSPM-7 directs the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), the U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury), and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to aggressively monitor, investigate, and take action against organizations purportedly linked — directly or indirectly — to acts of “political violence or domestic terrorism.” This new framework combines tax enforcement, financial tracing, and criminal prosecution tools — creating substantial risks and exposure for tax-exempt organizations (including charities, advocacy groups, and political organizations), along with their networks of funders and supporters.”

    • As Trump Administration Aims to Silence Dissent, Nonprofits Must Respond (Nonprofit Quarterly; 10 Oct 25)

      “More than 3,000 nonprofits have signed an open letter condemning the directive, assailing the administration memo as a violation of free speech and civic engagement. However, it’s clear that strongly worded letters can only achieve so much. NPQ spoke with experts about how, beyond writing letters of protest, nonprofits and the public can effectively respond.”

  • The Art of Replacing the Law with the Deal [opinion / analysis] (Balkinization; 4 Oct 25)

    “The “compact” is quite explicit: Universities that do not sign on to this thing thereby “elect[] to forego federal benefits.” What benefits? Well, that same first paragraph lists quite a few specific “benefits”: “(i) access to student loans, grant programs, and federal contracts; (ii) funding for research directly or indirectly; (iii) approval of student and other visas in connection with university matriculation and instruction; and (iv) preferential treatment under the tax code,” which means 501(c)(3) status. This compact is a “reward” in exactly the same sense that it is “rewarding” to purchase protection from the Mafia. The compact is an open, explicit threat. It nonetheless does represent a tactical shift on the part of the Trump Administration. The Trump team’s goal has not changed. They want an unprecedented—and flagrantly unconstitutional—degree of government oversight and control over American universities…the administration is pivoting to a new tactic, which seems to be to roll up the higher ed sector from what you might call the upper middle. Instead of starting at the very top with the high-stakes confrontation with Harvard and working their way down, the new tactical approach is to start with whichever prestigious schools seem likeliest—for various reasons—to be amenable to the government’s overtures. In the remainder of this blog post I’ll do two things at once. First, for the benefit of any journalists who read this, I think it’s important to lay out in a few simple bullet points what this “compact” does, and why the spin adopted by so many mainstream reporters is incorrect…Second, along the way, and at the end, I want to situate this “compact” in this administration’s overall approach to law. That approach is to try to sideline law itself—its regularity, predictability, transparency, and treating likes alike—and replace the law with “the deal.””

  • If Trump criminalizes Oakland officials for doing their jobs, the city attorney says he’ll defend them (The Oakland Side; 7 Oct 25)

    “Next week, the City Council’s Rules committee will discuss a resolution that delegates authority to the City Attorney to defend officials — which would include councilmembers — when they’ve been accused of committing a crime in the course of doing their job…“This is not based on any actual threat or specific threat against any official in Oakland, whatsoever,” Oakland’s supervising deputy city attorney, Selia Warren, told The Oaklandside. “This is merely us trying to be proactive and actually stay ahead of events. We would love to not have to use this, ever.” However, Warren also said, “Anyone can read the headlines in the news these days about what’s going on.””

Federal Restructuring

Federal Shutdown

Civil Society

Student Debt & Other Student Concerns

  • Trump administration considers sale of federal student loan debt (Politico; 7 Oct 25)

    “Trump administration officials are exploring options to sell off parts of the federal government’s $1.6 trillion student loan portfolio to the private market, according to three people familiar with the matter…Selling federal student loan debt raises significant logistical and legal concerns, adding new uncertainty for borrowers. Key questions include what happens to borrower protections—typically more generous than in the private market — and whether the government would continue guaranteeing any of the loans. The federal government enjoys more powerful debt-collection abilities — such as garnishing tax returns or Social Security benefits — than do private lenders.”

Conflicts Over Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility

Access to Justice