Around 9 million borrowers are potentially eligible for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program, based on a 2022 estimate from Protect Borrowers, a nonprofit focused on student loans, Newsweek reported.
However, a consortium of medical trade groups—including the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Psychiatric Association—has come out sharply condemning the new rule. In a post on X, they warned that it could be a huge obstacle to recruiting medical professionals in rural areas, many of which potentially include regions that supported Trump in the 2024 election.
“The AAFP and leading physician groups are alarmed by the Department of Education’s final rule on the PSLF program, which undermines a vital pathway that has enabled thousands of physicians to serve rural and underserved communities,” the statement read.
“PSLF is not just a loan program; it is a lifeline that allows medical graduates to choose primary care or psychiatry careers in high-need areas without being weighed down by insurmountable debt.”
Prior to Trump, the Biden administration adopted as broad a view as possible of PSLF in response to the Supreme Court ruling that he could not issue blanket student loan forgiveness to all borrowers below a certain income level.
Some commentators defended the new regulation. Preston Cooper of the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute argued, “The regulation defines ‘substantial illegal purpose’ narrowly — we’re just talking about clear violations of federal or state law. And borrowers can get PSLF credit for qualifying payments made *before* their employer is determined to be a crimebag.”
—
On a different note, political figures have also weighed in on related issues:
“Most importantly, the American people expect us to be focusing on our political adversaries on the left, and not attacking our friends on the right,” Roberts said. He continued, “I disagree with and even abhor things that Nick Fuentes says, but canceling him is not the answer either. When we disagree with someone’s thoughts and opinions, we challenge ideas with debate. And we have seen success with this as we continue to dismantle the vile ideas of the left.”
Political analysts and observers took to social media to share their thoughts. Political commentator Yashar Ali posted on X: “A watershed moment.”
“A shift like this would’ve been unthinkable for Heritage just three years ago,” added Ali.
Conservative journalist Michael Hunt wrote, “Respectfully, I’m not sure you are aware of the extent of this problem or how dark it truly is.”
Producer Danny Gold tweeted, “I don’t want anyone ‘cancelled,’ but I don’t want Hitler apologists masquerading as conservatives either. And they march at the drumbeat of people like Fuentes. American Nazi Party comeback.”
Podcast host Jim Stewartson called it out bluntly: “If evil exists, this is it.”
Political analyst John Cardillo weighed in, “If you can’t tell the difference between legitimate criticism of Israel, and the lunatic terror supporters and fake academics that Tucker is platforming in the name of antisemitism, you’re doing it wrong.”
—
A recently published piece examines North Carolina Supreme Court Justice Paul Newby, a born-again Christian elected to the bench in 2004 who believes he was called by God to exact what he calls “biblical justice.”
Over the past two decades, according to the author Clark, Newby has “turned his perch atop North Carolina’s Supreme Court into an instrument of political power” and “driven changes that have reverberated well beyond the borders of his state.”
Newby’s most significant contribution has been the landmark decision that legalized partisan gerrymandering in North Carolina — a state that once had some of the strongest laws in the country against partisan redistricting. This change enabled the state’s Republican-controlled Legislature to draw wildly slanted maps that netted the GOP an additional six seats in the U.S. House of Representatives in 2024. This effectively handed the party a national trifecta at the beginning of President Donald Trump’s second term, allowing him to wield extraordinary power almost free of congressional oversight.
Clark explains, “It’s just one of the ways Newby has provided a blueprint for conservatives to seize most of the nation’s state supreme courts, which have increasingly become the final arbiter on abortion rights, LGBTQ+ rights, and voting rights.”
The report was based on more than 70 interviews with those who know Newby professionally and personally. However, the author was unable to establish contact with Newby himself.
“I reached out to Newby multiple times during the course of my reporting and was even escorted out of a judicial conference while trying to interview him,” Clark wrote on social media. “The court’s communications director and media team also didn’t respond to detailed questions.”
When Clark attempted to contact Newby’s daughter for comment, he instead received an ominous message from the court’s communications director, Matt Mercer. Mercer characterized ProPublica’s investigation as a “jihad” against “NC Republicans” and warned that it “would not be met with dignifying any comments whatsoever.”
He continued: “I’m sure you’re aware of our connections with the Trump administration, and I’m sure they would be interested in this matter. I would strongly suggest dropping this story.”
Clark noted, “He bolded and underlined ‘strongly,’ in case we missed his point.”
Following publication — which highlighted Mercer’s threat — Mercer doubled down on social media, urging Trump to “feed ProPublica to the USAID wood chipper,” referencing the president’s near-total stripping of funds from the foreign aid agency.
—
Trump has issued an executive order slashing federal funds for media organizations supported by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, such as NPR and PBS, in response to critical coverage of his administration. However, it is unclear how he would impact ProPublica, which does not receive government funds but subsists on private grants and donations.
Mercer’s messages were widely perceived as a veiled attempt to coerce ProPublica into halting its inquiries.
Travis Fain, a freelance reporter formerly with Raleigh’s NBC News affiliate WRAL, expressed disbelief at Mercer’s belligerence on social media: “Well, there you go. The North Carolina Republican Party officially threatens journalists now.”
Wiley Nickel, former Democratic U.S. House Representative for North Carolina’s 13th District, lamented that it was “not normal” for a party official to “threaten ProPublica with retaliation from Trump” for writing a profile about another GOP official.
Despite the threats, Clark says, “ProPublica persisted” with the story that Mercer “warned [it] not to tell.”
Jessica Huseman, a former ProPublica reporter, commented, “I’m always amazed when grown-ups with jobs say things like this to journalists. Like, do you think that’s gonna do anything but make us more eager to publish the story?”
https://www.rawstory.com/trump-nuclear-2674252522/
