The Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP) submitted this comment in response to the U.S. Department of Education’s Reimagining and Improving Student Education (RISE) Committee’s ongoing rulemaking to implement student financial aid provisions under Public Law 119–21 and the Office of Postsecondary Education’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) issued on January 30, 2026.
By Wendy Chun-Hoon
Last night’s State of the Union address was the latest reminder of how the Trump Administration is devastating the lives of immigrants, workers, LGBTQ+ communities, children, families, and people of color by pushing them further to the margins. Last month, CLASP highlighted just a sampling of the administration’s actions and executive orders that target immigration, child care and early education, nutrition, economic supports, health care and mental health, housing, higher education, and workers’ rights. Trump demonstrated in his address that he plans to expand that 2025 playbook of destruction.
Despite Trump’s rhetoric about a “roaring economy,” this past year has been defined by cruelty, chaos, and a deliberate dismantling of the public benefit programs that families count on. His administration has manufactured crises, cut essential programs, and turned government agencies meant to serve all of us into tools of punishment and fear.
Massive Cuts to Public Benefit Programs
We heard lots of claims last night about the economy, but the ugly truth is that Trump has gutted the very programs that keep families healthy and fed. Last July, he signed H.R. 1, a sweeping law that will slash $793 billion from Medicaid and nearly $200 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) over 10 years—the largest cuts to those programs in our nation’s history. Trump bragged that he “lifted” 2.4 million Americans off of food assistance. To be clear, this translates to 2.4 million people being dropped from SNAP in an average month. And as a result of H.R.1, millions of families have already begun losing coverage or benefits. These cuts will result in:
And while he vowed in his address to protect Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, H.R. 1 included policies that would harm these programs.
Even the so-called “Trump Accounts,” which create $1,000 savings accounts for babies, are a mirage. They’ll widen the racial wealth gap by allowing wealthy families to enjoy the full benefits of the accounts, putting them even farther ahead of children in families who can’t afford to make added contributions to the initial amount.
The Trump Administration Has and Will Continue to Manufacture Crises
We can’t forget the manufactured government shutdown of late 2025, which was the longest in U.S. history. It wasn’t just a political stunt; it was an act of sabotage that threatened millions of families with the prospect of losing the SNAP and WIC benefits that allow them to keep food on the table. In addition, thousands of families who depend on Head Start faced closed doors at their centers, with many more facing the real possibility of closures. Moreover, the shutdown forced health insurance premiums to skyrocket after Congress let Affordable Care Act subsidies expire. When Trump boasts about a “turnaround for the ages,” remember: his austerity didn’t come at the expense of billionaires. It came at the expense of families.
The president continues to follow the playbook of bringing up fraud, even claiming last night that eliminating fraud would “balance the budget overnight.” We should take factual instances of fraud seriously and address them. But he’s using these allegations as a pretext to cut basic needs programs, demonize immigrants and families with low incomes, and as another strategy for taking away the help people need to care for themselves and their families.
Cruel Attacks on Immigrants
The most vivid example of the cruelty of Trump’s second term has been his relentless assault on immigrant families. Within weeks of taking office last year, his administration had unleashed indiscriminate enforcement actions, turning routine traffic stops into family separations and deportation threats. He reinstated family detention, removed restrictions on conducting immigration enforcement at sensitive locations like schools and hospitals, reopened the notorious family detention facility in Dilley, Texas, and is attempting to deny birthright citizenship—a direct attack on the 14th Amendment.
In his State of the Union, Trump claimed these measures were about “restoring safety.” But the only thing they’ve restored is fear. Mixed-status families are living with constant anxiety. Teachers have watched children burst into tears when a classmate’s parent fails to show up at pickup. Immigrant communities are skipping doctor’s appointments and food pantries because they’re terrified that they will be detained. And to be clear, this indiscriminate and reckless immigration agenda is harming everyone. Administration officials are profiling and assaulting and detaining citizens and immigrants alike in communities across the country.
Disregard for Workers, People Pushed to the Margins
Trump has also undermined the rights of workers and students at every turn. His administration axed diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility programs across federal agencies and rescinded rules that made workplaces safe. The Department of Education reclassified nursing and social-work degrees as “non-professional,” making students ineligible for essential loan programs.
Although the president loves to describe himself as “pro-worker,” the thousands of laid-off federal workers and the millions of people now at risk of losing child care and housing support would disagree. In fact, throughout the longest State of the Union address ever, Trump said nothing to address the struggles everyday families face, for instance failing to mention the child care affordability crisis even once.
Fortifying the State of OUR Union
The State of the Union is supposed to be a moment for the nation to take stock and see who we are as a society. But Trump’s address was a work of fiction. The real state of our union is fragile, strained, and deeply unequal, not because families failed to work hard enough, but because the government failed to protect them.
Advocates who care about people who have been marginalized, along with everyday Americans have a choice in the months ahead: to accept this cruelty as normal or to demand better. We can start by amplifying the truth. Share reports like CLASP’s timeline of harm. Support local food banks, mutual-aid networks, and immigrant-rights groups doing the work that Washington refuses to do. And call on legislators to support policies that help, not undermine, our communities.
We must all fight because the state of our union—the one rooted in compassion, justice, and community—depends on what we do next.
By Kaelin Rapport
Kaelin Rapport, Ph.D., a policy analyst on CLASP’s Racial Equity team, discusses the organization’s new youth mobile crisis program guidelines in this February 2026 AMSA Talks interview.
By Christian Collins, Teon Hayes, Kaelin Rapport
2026 marks the 250th anniversary of the United States, and this February brings the 10oth anniversary of Black History Month. The Association for the Study of African American Life and History, which founded Black History Month, calls us to celebrate Black history across the African Diaspora and how that history is tied to Black people’s current material conditions. Those conditions have become more precarious as the Trump Administration enacts its agenda to”Make American Great Again.”
Considering these two anniversaries, we should ask ourselves what great means, and great for whom? In the first year of Trump’s second term, his administration has enacted explicitly discriminatory policies reversing the progress made by civil rights leaders and activists in the struggle for equity. These actions disproportionately harm Black communities and destroy measures implemented to right historical wrongs.
Acknowledging the past through reparations is a necessary step toward building a future where the white supremacy undergirding the MAGA movement is stamped out. While there has been abundant research on racial inequality, more direct examination on how best to address harm and evaluate the impact of existing reparative policies and programs is needed. We can learn from those that have gotten off the ground so that all communities, especially ones still dealing with the legacies of slavery and Jim Crow, can thrive.
Last summer’s passage of H.R.1 threatens to drastically cut SNAP benefits, placing millions of families at risk of food insecurity. These policies directly impact families like Ashley Blair’s, for whom programs like WIC are not just helpful—they are lifelines.
This blog is the second in a series by Ashley, a member of CLASP’s Community Partnership Group and VOICE (Victory Over Injustice Creates Equality). The series examines the importance of food justice and access to essential programs like WIC, and reminds us that everyone deserves the resources they need to thrive. Read her first blog here.
By Ashley Blair
We are living in a world that is more plant-forward than ever, with a range of products offering a variety of plant-based meat alternatives that give the same flavor and texture as meat by using ingredients made from plants. As a result, many people choose nutritious plant-based and vegan options to optimize their health. Yet at the same time, legislation aimed at restricting what families can purchase with public benefits is affecting families across the country. As lawmakers propose new limits on eligible foods, increasing oversight, and narrowing choice for households, their actions raise a number of questions: how can it be that there are policies that police what individuals on WIC and SNAP are able to purchase? Why are there very few policies fighting for accessible, nutritious foods across the country—specifically, plant-based foods?
At its core, this tension raises a deeper question: are these policies truly about nutrition, or are they about control? Because when restrictions expand under the banner of “health” but fail to expand access, affordability, and dignity, these policies risk being more hurtful than helpful.
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, when someone applies for WIC benefits, they undergo a comprehensive nutrition assessment conducted by registered dietitians/registered dietitian nutritionists, though this varies by local agency. Significantly more urban and large agencies use these professionals for nutrition and breastfeeding assessments than small or rural agencies, which are more likely to have nurses conduct the assessment. As a result of the assessment, food packages can be individually tailored to meet participants’ needs, and substitutions, modifications, and/or eliminations can be made to accommodate special dietary needs or cultural and personal preferences. For example, a vegan parent who is breastfeeding may swap peanut butter for eggs, while someone with a peanut butter allergy could receive canned or dry beans instead. On paper, this flexibility suggests autonomy. In practice, however, that autonomy is often limited by rigid decisions that determine which products are actually approved.
From my personal experience in a plant-based, health-conscious household, it has been difficult to get certain plant-based options for my son with WIC. There are some options I’m able to switch out; for instance, instead of buying Juicy Juice, I get additional funds for fruits and vegetables. But there are some items I’m not able to receive. For example, the vegan options for milk and tofu are soy-based, and my household does not consume soy; but at least in Tennessee, where I live, there are no other plant-based options. Likewise, there is no plant-based yogurt option and no canned fish alternative. While WIC state agencies may choose to offer tahini as a seed butter alternative to peanut butter, that flexibility is inconsistent and often unavailable. These gaps send a clear message: participation in public benefits means accepting limited choice.
After doing my own research, I found that the Ripple pea protein milk my son drinks offers a similar nutritional profile to the soy-based milk—both provide eight grams of protein per serving—while Ripple offers more vitamin D, which is essential for healthy growth and development. Yet despite comparable nutrition, purchasing this product requires medical documentation to justify the substitution. This requirement creates an unnecessary burden for participants and may lead to inequitable access to WIC-eligible foods. When families must prove their preferences or cultural practices through paperwork, the policy shifts from support to surveillance.
I believe everyone deserves access to healthy, delicious food, regardless of lifestyle or dietary needs. Families who prioritize minimally processed, plant-based ingredients to nourish body and soul should not face additional barriers simply because they receive public benefits. Accessibility should mean making healthy eating effortless, delivering convenience and affordability without stigma or excessive gatekeeping.
State and federal lawmakers must re-examine the direction of these policies. When drafting legislation that shapes what families can purchase with WIC and SNAP, pause and imagine your own family gathered around the dinner table, enjoying a meal without compromise—without being told your values, culture, or dietary needs are invalid. No family receiving public benefits should be forced to choose between their health, their beliefs, and their groceries.
Public benefit programs were designed to support health and well-being, not control or restrict how families nourish themselves. True food justice means expanding choice, trusting families, and crafting policies that reflect the full diversity of how communities eat, live, and thrive. Anything less undermines the very purpose of these programs.
January 20, 2026, Washington, D.C. – The first year of Donald Trump’s second term has been marked by unprecedented attacks on economic, racial, and gender justice. In a new report titled “The First Year of Trump’s Second Term: Harms to Children, Families, and Workers,” the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP) provides a sampling of how the Trump Administration has pushed immigrants, workers, LGBTQ+ communities, and people of color further to the margins.
CLASP’s report is not intended to be a comprehensive list. Rather, it highlights a number of specific actions and executive orders in the areas of immigration, child care and early education, nutrition, economic supports, health care and mental health, housing, higher education, and workers’ rights. In addition to documenting the harms of this past year, the report offers an overview of responsive actions taken by communities, policymakers, and courts to withstand and counter the administration’s constant attacks on children, families, and workers. Finally, it provides ways that individuals and communities can fight back against these attacks.
“We know Trump’s playbook,” said Wendy Chun-Hoon, president and executive director of CLASP. “We know that firing federal workers and slashing the federal government is a blow to the health care and public services that all our families count on.”
“We know that the funding bait and switch that’s canceled food and nutrition programs in order to expand ICE and ‘protect’ us is making all our child care centers and communities less safe. And we know that this playbook of harm, hypocrisy, and hate lines the pockets of Trump’s billionaire cronies while all the rest of our families struggle to pay for groceries and rent,” said Chun-Hoon.
“CLASP is paying attention to the harm and fear being inflicted by the very people who should be supporting us. Our communities are paying attention. And we won’t stop fighting for what we know everyone needs to thrive,” she said
The report is downloadable here.
CLASP’s new timeline, “The First Year of Trump’s Second Term: Harms to Children, Families, and Workers,” provides a clear illustration of just some of the ways that President Trump and his administration have targeted and harmed families, children, immigrants, communities of color, women, and people with low incomes.
This timeline highlights a number of specific actions and executive orders taken in the areas of immigration, child care, early education, higher education, workers’ rights, and public benefits during the first year of Trump’s second term. In its totality, this document shows that children, families, students, and workers are worse off after a year of the Trump Administration’s consistent attacks on people’s rights and access to support. This timeline is not intended to be a comprehensive list. While this document focuses on the administration’s actions, it’s important to note that those actions have emboldened hostility by individuals, states, and localities to families, immigrants, Black and brown communities, LGBTQ+ individuals, and other communities. It also offers important reminders of actions Trump attempted to take that, as of now, have not come to pass–including his effort to revoke birthright citizenship.
Finally, the timeline presents an overview of some responsive actions taken by communities, policymakers, and courts to withstand and counter the administration’s constant attacks on children, families, and workers; and suggests ways for individuals and communities to fight back against these attacks. In order to define our path forward, we need to understand what we’re fighting against. It is our intention that this timeline will demonstrate what the Trump Administration has done so far as we prepare for continued and new threats.
By Shira Small and Isha Weerasinghe
High maternal mortality rates and rising mental health stressors across the country underscore the need for policies, research, and programming that support maternal mental health and evaluate existing services, particularly for communities of color who face disproportionate barriers to accessing care.
This paper seeks to advance maternal mental health care and policy that best serves communities of color and other historically disenfranchised populations, highlighting both progress and opportunities for improvement.
Using Michigan and Colorado as case studies, the report analyzes key state-level policies and programs ascertained through informant interviews, focus groups, and background research to identify existing services, policies, funding streams, and the broader context in both states. Through this analysis, the authors aim to help policymakers develop, evaluate, and advance maternal mental health systems to eliminate inequities in their own states.
Barriers to maternal mental health care have deadly consequences. In Michigan, 81 percent of Black maternal deaths are preventable, and these inequities persist regardless of income level. In Detroit specifically, pregnant Black people are 2.2 times more at risk of maternal mortality than their white counterparts.
Similarly, in Colorado, pregnant Black and Indigenous people face the highest maternal mortality rates in the state, and almost 40 percent of Colorado counties are considered maternal health care deserts, meaning they lack a hospital, birth center, or obstetric care providers. Existing disparities and implementation challenges have been compounded by diminishing fiscal support from the federal government.
The Trump Administration’s 2025 budget package is expected to greatly deplete funding for federal health programs, including those serving communities of color, communities with low incomes, and other historically marginalized groups.
Many of the state-administered programs discussed in this report distribute federal funding to local communities, meaning their work is at risk. Current and upcoming federal funding cuts have already changed program infrastructure and will greatly impact the programs discussed in this report and the families they serve.
Maternal mental health is a rising policy priority in Michigan, with Governor Gretchen Whitmer’s leadership fueling legislative efforts to address maternal mortality inequities in the state. Positive policy developments include:
Colorado lawmakers have also achieved legislative momentum for maternal mental health, with the COVID-19 pandemic underscoring the need to better support new parents.
Efforts in the state legislature built on the creation of the Colorado Behavioral Health Task Force Governor Jared Polis commissioned in 2019, but strict budget limitations across the state have restricted progress.
Positive policy developments include:
Despite the increased awareness, interest, and policy development to improve maternal mental health in both states, key informants felt that their state still needs more policies in place to support birthing people’s needs and expand the supply of affordable, accessible, and culturally responsive care.
Amid efforts to improve the system, there can still be a disconnect between policymakers, providers, and directly impacted groups.
The report makes recommendations to help states provide equitable care that prioritizes the well-being of people during the perinatal, pregnancy, and postpartum periods. They include, but are not limited to:
To read the full report, please reach out to Shira Small and Isha Weerasinghe.
This statement can be attributed to Wendy Chun-Hoon, president and executive director of the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP).
Washington, D.C., January 9, 2026 – This week, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has announced the withholding of funding for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) child care subsidies, and the Social Services Block Grant (SSBG) program from California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, and New York. These states stand to lose a total of $10 billion in federal funding this year for allegations of fraud. And the administration has already signaled that broader cuts may be coming.
Arbitrarily withholding federal funds from these five states is illegal, reckless, and cruel. While instances of fraud should be taken seriously, these unilateral actions to freeze funding for basic needs programs cause widespread harm. In fact, there is no evidence to prove the alleged claims. Programs already have extensive built-in mechanisms for managing allegations, ranging from detailed state plans outlining intentions for how resources will be utilized to extensive reporting and audit requirements.
TANF provides families who have very low incomes with temporary monthly cash assistance, work activities and support, and child care services. Children and families will bear the brunt of these cuts, while already facing an affordability crisis and cuts to other critical public benefit programs, like SNAP and Medicaid. Without TANF funding, families with low incomes won’t have access to monthly cash assistance that helps parents afford essentials like rent, diapers, and groceries.
Freezing CCDF funds for child care centers and family child care homes will threaten providers’ ability to provide services and keep their doors open, which will challenge access to care for parents. Most programs operate on razor-thin margins with limited or no reserves. This comes on top of all states being required by the “defend the spend” directive to provide detailed justification to draw down resources to support child care subsidies.
SSBG freezes will not only impact child care but also local health services, services for vulnerable and elderly adults, services for individuals with disabilities, and more.
This all comes at a time when states face an increasingly challenging budgetary environment, especially as they begin to implement mandatory changes in SNAP and other programs specified in H.R. 1, which narrowly passed last July and creates new barriers to food assistance and health coverage that will leave millions hungry and uninsured. Moreover, the increased costs of health coverage follow the failure of Congress and the administration to extend the enhanced premium tax credits for the ACA Marketplace. Families are already experiencing increased costs of living. The administration’s persistence in further burdening families by stripping away supports that allow them to thrive will have devastating consequences for all our communities and states.
The Trump Administration is using politically motivated, racist, and anti-immigrant commentary to villainize those who oppose them and excuse the illegal withholding of federal funding. Children, families, and child care providers will suffer from these actions. Moreover, state administrators of these programs are already facing confusion and chaos, adding to the existing burden of navigating the barrage of regulatory contradictions from the administration. HHS should reverse this decision and provide all states with their funding to serve children and families.
The Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP) submitted a comment opposing the Department of Homeland Security’s proposal to rescind the 2022 public charge regulations without replacement. The proposed rule would intensify fear and confusion by failing to replace the 2022 regulations with clear standards or guidance. Instead, DHS signals that it may reinterpret public charge in the future. Without clear guidelines on what benefits may be considered, the proposal would trigger a renewed chilling effect, discouraging immigrant families from accessing essential health, nutrition, and housing supports. This would increase poverty, hunger, poor health, and housing instability, particularly for children, including U.S. citizen children. The proposal would also harm states, localities, and child-serving providers by undermining participation in programs designed to support economic stability and security. CLASP urges the Department of Homeland Security to withdraw the proposed regulation in its entirety and maintain the 2022 public charge regulations currently in effect.