If enacted, the new rules would redefine qualifying employers and exclude organizations judged to have a “substantial illegal purpose,” creating more uncertainty in eligibility for those committed to public service careers. 

Several national coalitions are evaluating the impact, and there are calls to action to many nonprofit professionals. Importantly, the National Council of Nonprofits’ analysis states: 

The proposed rule seeks to unlawfully bar certain charitable nonprofit employers from the program if the Department determines – by a preponderance of the evidence – that the employer engages in “activities that have a substantial illegal purpose.” Under the proposed rule, this includes:

• “Aiding and abetting violations of federal immigration laws;”
• “Supporting terrorism;”
• “Engaging in the chemical and surgical castration or mutilation of children in violation of federal or state laws;”
• “Engaging in the trafficking of children to states for the purpose of emancipation from their lawful parents in violation of federal or state law;”
• “Engaging in a pattern of aiding and abetting illegal discrimination;”
• “Engaging in a pattern of violating state laws” regarding trespassing, disorderly conduct, public nuisance, vandalism, or obstruction of highways.

This directly threatens nonprofit employers working with undocumented immigrants, supporting transgender children, or advancing racial and social equity.

Highlighting how these changes could jeopardize future public interest attorneys’ ability to serve low-income litigants is critical for ensuring the program remains accessible and effective. Please consider voicing your perspective so policymakers understand the real-world impact these barriers would have on recruiting and retaining public interest professionals.