Overview

Title

To provide that individuals convicted of certain crimes relating to institutions of higher education are ineligible for Federal student financial assistance under title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, and for other purposes.

ELI5 AI

S. 4302 is a bill that says if someone does bad things like breaking stuff or causing a big mess during a protest at a school, they can't get help from the government to pay for college. This rule would start in July 2025.

Summary AI

S. 4302 is a bill aimed at making individuals who are convicted of specific crimes related to protesting at institutions of higher education ineligible for federal student financial aid. The bill targets those who are found guilty of offenses such as unlawful assembly, rioting, trespassing, or property damage during a protest at a college or university. These individuals would not be able to receive grants, loans, or work-study assistance under the Higher Education Act of 1965 as of July 1, 2025.

Published

2024-05-09
Congress: 118
Session: 2
Chamber: SENATE
Status: Introduced in Senate
Date: 2024-05-09
Package ID: BILLS-118s4302is

Keywords AI

federal student financial assistance higher education act of 1965 protests at institutions of higher education no hamas act trespassing during protest property damage during protest student financial aid ineligibility antisemitic protest terrorist sympathizing unlawful assembly at universities

Sources

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
2
Words:
493
Pages:
3
Sentences:
10

Language

Nouns: 148
Verbs: 32
Adjectives: 24
Adverbs: 1
Numbers: 24
Entities: 37

Complexity

Average Token Length:
4.09
Average Sentence Length:
49.30
Token Entropy:
4.74
Readability (ARI):
25.85

AnalysisAI

General Summary of the Bill

The proposed legislation, known as the "No Higher education Assistance for Mobs of Antisemitic and terrorist Sympathizing Students Act" or the "No HAMAS Act," seeks to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965. Its primary aim is to make individuals who are convicted of certain offenses related to protests at higher education institutions ineligible for federal student financial assistance, such as grants, loans, or work-study opportunities. Specifically, the bill targets individuals convicted of unlawful assembly, rioting, trespassing, or property damage during protests on college campuses. The new rules would begin applying to financial assistance starting July 1, 2025.

Summary of Significant Issues

The bill raises several concerns, primarily due to its potentially controversial language and implications:

  1. Inflammatory Language: The title of the Act is highly provocative, associating students with antisemitic and terrorist sympathizing activities without explicit definitions or criteria. This could lead to bias and conflict as it stigmatizes student activism broadly.

  2. Ambiguity in Definitions: Terms such as "mob," "antisemitic," and "terrorist sympathizing" are not clearly defined. This lack of clarity might result in arbitrary enforcement and potential misuse of the law.

  3. Retroactive Effect: The law's retroactive application starting July 1, 2025, may affect individuals who were convicted before the law comes into effect, raising fairness and legal concerns.

  4. Enforcement Challenges: The bill's clause on "conduct occurring at and during the course of a protest" could be interpreted in various ways, causing confusion over what constitutes disqualifying behavior.

  5. Property Damage Clarity: The term "damaging property" requires further definition to determine what level of damage results in loss of eligibility, potentially leading to legal ambiguity.

Impact on the Public

The bill could broadly impact student behavior and campus activism by potentially deterring students from participating in protests due to the fear of losing financial aid. While it aims to protect college campuses from damage and disruptions during protests, it might also suppress free speech or peaceful protest activities that are traditionally a vital part of university life and democratic engagement.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

  • Students: The most direct impact would be on students, particularly those who rely heavily on federal financial aid for their education. The possibility of losing financial aid could dissuade students from exercising their rights to protest, which may disproportionately affect low-income and minority students who heavily depend on such assistance.

  • Institutions of Higher Education: Colleges and universities might face challenges in maintaining an environment that encourages free speech and protest, integral parts of academic discourse. The ambiguity regarding what constitutes as disqualifying conduct might result in the inconsistent application across different institutions.

  • Legal and Political Communities: The legislation could ignite legal debates over its interpretation, constitutionality, and potential infringement on civil liberties. Political debates may occur regarding the balance between maintaining campus order and preserving students' rights to protest.

In conclusion, while the bill seeks to address issues of property damage and disruption at educational institutions, its approach generates significant ethical, legal, and social concerns that could have far-reaching implications for students and educational institutions alike.

Issues

  • The title of the Act, 'No Higher education Assistance for Mobs of Antisemitic and terrorist Sympathizing Students Act' or 'No HAMAS Act', is potentially inflammatory and could create bias by associating students with terrorist activities without clear definition or evidence. This issue could have significant ethical and political implications. (Section 1)

  • The lack of precise definitions for terms like 'antisemitic,' 'terrorist sympathizing,' and 'mob' in the title could lead to misinterpretation or misuse, allowing for potentially arbitrary or discriminatory application. This raises legal and ethical concerns. (Section 1)

  • The bill's retroactive application starting July 1, 2025, may raise fairness concerns for individuals convicted before the amendment was enacted, potentially leading to legal and ethical issues. (Section 2)

  • The clause 'conduct occurring at and during the course of a protest' introduces potential ambiguity in enforcement, as it might be interpreted in various ways. This could lead to legal challenges regarding what constitutes such conduct. (Section 2)

  • The term 'damaging property' might require further clarification regarding the degree of damage necessary to trigger ineligibility for financial aid, which could lead to ambiguity and legal challenges. (Section 2)

  • The definition of 'institution of higher education' relies on a cross-reference to another section of the Act, complicating understanding for those unfamiliar with the specifics of the legislation, which could lead to confusion or misinterpretation. (Section 2)

Sections

Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.

1. Short title Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section describes the official title of the law, which can be referred to as the "No Higher education Assistance for Mobs of Antisemitic and terrorist Sympathizing Students Act" or simply the "No HAMAS Act".

2. Suspension of eligibility for financial assistance under the Higher Education Act of 1965 Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The bill amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 to make individuals who are convicted of offenses such as trespassing or damaging property during a protest on a college campus ineligible for financial aid like grants or loans. This change will apply to financial assistance offered starting July 1, 2025.