June 30 Federal Update: Senate Advances H.R.1 – The One Big Beautiful Bill

In a vote of 51-49, the Senate voted to proceed with a key procedural step to advance H.R.1, often referred to as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The bill contains critical provisions expected to significantly reduce access to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Medicare, and the Earned Income Tax Credit by decreasing funding and increasing eligibility verification requirements. To review the changes expected to significantly impact the social service sector, read Social Current’s issue summary.

Following extended debate during the weekend, the Senate began hosting a series of votes this morning, at 9 a.m. ET, through a process that allows an unlimited number of amendments to be brought to the floor. Senators plan to offer amendments that would impact a broad array of issues, including SNAP, Medicaid, and rural hospitals.

After voting on amendments, the Senate will vote on the final bill. If the bill passes, the Senate and House will then work collaboratively to unify their versions of the bill, ensuring a singular, identical bill is agreed upon by both chambers.

As the House and Senate deliberate, it is important to make your voice heard. Social Current has created a sample message to send to your representatives. Take action today!

Children’s Bureau Outlines Implementation of the Supporting America’s Children and Families Act

The Administration for Children and Families has released an information memorandum detailing implementation of the Supporting America’s Children and Families Act, signed into law Jan. 4, 2025. The legislation includes major updates relevant for the social service sector.

For the first time in over 15 years, the bill fully reauthorizes Title IV-B child welfare programs, providing resources to states, tribes, and territories for family preservation, child safety, and support for foster youth through fiscal year 2029. It also aims to address workforce challenges, prevent unnecessary separations, and expand funding and flexibility afforded to tribes.

View Social Current’s one-pager for a summary of the Supporting America’s Children and Families Act and its impact on the social sector.

Key provisions will take effect Oct. 1, 2025.

CMS Finalizes Rule Impacting ACA Enrollment and Eligibility

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has finalized a rule that significantly alters eligibility and enrollment under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), with major implications for access and affordability.

Effective Aug. 25, 2025, the rule eliminates the monthly special enrollment period for individuals with projected household incomes at or below 150% of the federal poverty level. It also standardizes the Annual Open Enrollment Period starting with the 2027 plan year.

In addition, the rule excludes Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients from eligibility and enrollment in ACA Exchange coverage and Basic Health Program (BHP) coverage in States that elect to operate a BHP.

CMS estimates that between 725,000 and 1.8 million people will lose coverage in 2026 as a result of the final rule.

For further information, CMS released a fact sheet outlining the finalized policies. 

House Committee Reviews Policies and Priorities of the Department of Education

TThe House Committee on Education and Workforce held a hearing to examine the Department of Education’s current policies and future direction. Lawmakers affirmed their commitment to a thriving education system and a workforce prepared to succeed. They raised concerns about the student loans crisis and called for stronger federal protections for borrowers.

Education Secretary McMahon testified on the Department’s efforts to eliminate federal bureaucracy, reduce waste, and empower states, parents, and educators. She underscored the importance of accountability, safe learning environments, and effective higher education. Key priorities included addressing the student loan debt crisis, simplifying repayment programs, and expanding access to workforce PELL grants.

Committee members expressed concern for the Department’s oversight of federal grants, training, legal compliance, funding for magnet schools and special education, and future support for programs such as the Perkins Grant Program.

House Committee Weighs Solutions to Child Care Accessibility Crisis

The House Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education held a hearing to address the rising cost of child care, which has become unaffordable for countless families amid increasing living expenses. Ranking Member Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.) cited an estimated $122 billion in annual lost earnings and productivity that child care challenges for parents and caregivers in the workforce cost the economy.

Lawmakers emphasized the need for innovative, sustainable approaches to strengthen the child care sector. Chairman Kevin Kiley (R-Ca) encouraged public private partnerships while Bonamici raised concerns about communities lacking access to resources needed to implement such solutions equitably.

Witnesses underscored the essential role of accessible child care for families, similarly boosting workforce participation, business productivity, and promoting long-term economic mobility. They also emphasized the need for flexibility and choice to reflect the diverse needs of communities and working parents.

House Subcommittee Discusses Services Available to Youth Exiting Foster Care

The House Ways and Means Committee’s Work and Welfare Subcommittee, recently held the hearing, “Aging Out is Not a Plan: Reimagining Futures for Foster Youth.” Chairman Darin LaHood (R-Ill.) and Ranking Member Danny Davis (D-Ill.) affirmed the committee’s bipartisan commitment to supporting children and improving outcomes for families. They discussed the Foster Care Independence Act of 1999 and services offered by the John H. Chafee Foster Care Independence Program, including independent living services and Education and Training Vouchers.

Committee members and witnesses stressed the challenges youth face after exiting the foster care system, highlighting challenges accessing mental health care, housing, and higher education. They referred to a recent report from the Government Accountability Office, which details states’ underutilization of Chafee funds, likely due to administrative barriers and red tape that complicate states’ ability to draw down funds. The challenges are compounded by the fragmented and disconnected nature of services, leaving youth to navigate a complex web of services.

In sharing their experiences, witnesses detailed similar barriers to accessing needed services. They also stressed the transformative power of family, peer connections, and community to support youth in achieving their dreams and goals, while maintaining their health and well-being. Additional recommendations included increasing funding limits for allowed yearly education costs alongside rising costs of attendance. Additionally, witnesses recommended expanding the definition of qualified education and training programs for Education and Training Voucher (ETV) funds to include programs in the trade and technical career pathways.

Committee members stressed their commitment to working collaboratively to improve Chafee to provide better support and help youth achieve their full potential, and they thanked individuals who have received foster care services for sharing their experiences, wisdom, and expertise.

Sector Updates from the Judiciary   

Supreme Court Upholds U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

The Supreme Court upheld the structure of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, a section of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which sets no-cost coverage for preventive services. Following the Affordable Care Act, health insurers and group health plans are required to provide the recommended preventive services without copayments, deductibles, or additional cost-sharing charges for patients.

A lawsuit was filed alleging the task force members were unconstitutionally appointed; however, a 6-3 majority affirmed the appointments were consistent with the Constitution’s Appointments Clause.

The ruling safeguards access to preventive care for an estimated 40 million individuals, according to a study conducted by Stanford University’s Stanford Prevention Policy Modeling Lab.

Supreme Court Restricts Federal Judges’ Authority to Grant Nationwide Injunctions

In a lawsuit regarding the legality of President Trump’s executive order prohibiting birthright citizenship, the Supreme Court answered an essential larger question of the legality of issuing nationwide injunctions.

The conservative majority determined that the ability to grant federal injunctions lies beyond the authority of lower courts. Writing for the majority, Justice Barrett asserted the role of federal courts is not to “exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch; they resolve cases and controversies consistent with the authority Congress has given them.”

Litigation determining the legality of birthright citizenship will continue as the Supreme Court remained silent on its constitutionality. In the interim, the decision’s impact extends to more than 40 nationwide injunctions affecting key issues, including federal funding freezes. However, it remains silent on an additional pathway for individuals and organizations to seek relief against harmful federal orders: class action lawsuits.

Supreme Court Upholds Tennessee Ban on Gender-Affirming Care for Youth 

The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld a Tennessee law banning the use of puberty blockers and hormone therapy for transgender minors, ruling that it does not violate the Constitution’s equal protection clause. The decision, split along ideological lines, allows the law to remain in effect.

In the majority opinion, the justices stated that because the law does not breach constitutional protections, policy decisions on the matter should be left to “the people, their elected representatives, and the democratic process.” They also noted that the law does not make distinctions based on sex, but instead prohibits providers from administering certain treatments to minors regardless of gender.

Tennessee is one of 27 states that have enacted laws restricting or banning gender-affirming care for youth. Many of these laws face ongoing legal challenges, including in Arkansas and Montana, where courts have struck down similar measures.

The decision also follows a recent Supreme Court ruling that requires schools to offer children and parents the opportunity to opt out from public school lessons utilizing LGBTQ-themed storybooks.

Supreme Court Sends New York Abortion Coverage Mandate Back for Review

The U.S. Supreme Court has ordered the New York Court of Appeals to reconsider a ruling that requires employer health insurance plans to cover medically necessary abortion services. The mandate was codified into state law in 2022.

The decision to remand the case follows a recent Supreme Court ruling that Wisconsin violated the rights of Catholic-affiliated charitable organizations by denying them a state unemployment tax exemption—an outcome that may influence how religious exemptions are considered in similar cases.

Supreme Court Limits Medicaid Beneficiaries’ Right to Sue Over Provider Choice 

In a decision split along ideological lines, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Medicaid beneficiaries cannot sue to challenge a state’s decision to exclude a health care provider from the program. The case centered on South Carolina’s move to bar Planned Parenthood from its Medicaid program due to the organization’s provision of abortion services.

The lawsuit was brought by Julie Edwards, a patient who had received care from Planned Parenthood and sought to continue receiving all reproductive and gynecological services there.

Writing for the majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch stated that the Medicaid Act does not clearly establish a private right of action allowing individuals to sue states for access to “any qualified provider.”

The ruling overturns a lower court decision from the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which had found that the Medicaid Act created enforceable rights under federal civil rights law and had previously blocked South Carolina from excluding Planned Parenthood.

The decision is expected to have significant implications for health care access. By limiting the ability of Medicaid recipients to challenge provider exclusions, it narrows recourse when states cut off funding for organizations like Planned Parenthood—even for services unrelated to abortion. 

Federal Court Strikes Down Reproductive Health Care Privacy Rule

A federal judge in the Northern District of Texas has invalidated a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) rule aimed at strengthening privacy protections for reproductive health care. The court ruled that HHS exceeded its legal authority in issuing the 2024 HIPAA Rule to Support Reproductive Health Care Privacy. The rule prohibited HIPAA-covered entities from using or disclosing protected health information for purposes such as criminal investigations related to the lawful provision or receipt of reproductive health care.

Key provisions of the rule included:

• Broadly defining “reproductive health care” to include services such as abortion, gender-affirming care, IVF, STD screenings, maternity care, contraception, vasectomies, and mammograms.
• Barring the use or disclosure of protected health information if it would support prohibited activities like investigations into lawful care.
• Establishing safeguards to prevent misuse of requested reproductive health information.

The court found the rule unlawfully restricted state public health laws and improperly redefined terms such as “person” and “public health.” While most of the rule has been blocked nationwide, limited protections for substance use disorder treatment records remain intact.

Supreme Court Blocks Rule Requiring Advance Notice for Deportations

The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld a Trump-era policy allowing the federal government to deport individuals to third countries, even if those are not their countries of origin. The decision overturns a lower court ruling that had required the government to give individuals at risk of deportation 10 days’ notice and the opportunity to argue that they could face persecution or torture.

The Court found that the lower court’s mandate overstepped judicial authority and interfered with presidential discretion and foreign diplomacy.

Federal Court Orders Reinstatement of Education Department Civil Rights Staff

A federal judge has ordered the reinstatement of employees fired from the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR), issuing a preliminary injunction effective June 19. The ruling halts a March directive from the Trump administration that closed seven of OCR’s 12 regional offices and cut half of its 550-person staff.

The lawsuit was filed by the Massachusetts-based Victims Rights Law Center on behalf of two students, arguing that the reduction in staff created a severe resource gap that harmed students facing sexual, racial, and disability discrimination.

U.S. District Judge Myong J. Joun found that the plaintiffs experienced harm due to delayed investigations, which directly affected their ability to access education.

Federal Judge Blocks AmeriCorps from Revoking Previously Awarded EDI Funds

A federal judge in the Northern District of California has ruled that AmeriCorps cannot rescind or suspend grant funding based on compliance with executive orders tied to equity, diversity, inclusion (EDI); gender, or climate policy. The decision prevents the agency from enforcing a Feb. 13 directive requiring all grant activities to align with executive orders from the Trump administration as a condition of funding.

The ruling came after AmeriCorps attempted to revoke $650,000 in previously awarded funding from the San Francisco Unified School District, targeting programs that incorporate EDI practices. U.S. District Judge Edward M. Chen found the district faced irreparable harm if the funding were withdrawn.

The decision replaces an earlier temporary restraining order issued in March and affirms prior rulings that determined conditions tied to anti-EDI and related executive orders are likely too vague to be legally enforceable.

While litigation continues, AmeriCorps is barred from freezing, terminating, or altering any existing grant funds awarded to the district for EDI-related programs.

New York Court of Appeals Affirms Resentencing Rights for Domestic Violence Survivors

The New York Court of Appeals has upheld the authority of appellate courts to resentence incarcerated individuals under the Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act (DVSJA), a state law allowing courts to consider the impact of domestic abuse when determining criminal sentences.

In a split decision, the court ruled that the Albany-based Third Appellate Department acted within its authority when it reduced the sentence of a domestic violence survivor. The appellate court’s decision overruled a trial court judge who had previously denied the resentencing request under the DVSJA.

The ruling reinforces the role of higher courts in ensuring that survivors of domestic violence receive fair consideration during sentencing.

Subscribe to the Policy and Advocacy Radar to receive our biweekly policy roundup, which includes commentary on issues in Social Current’s federal policy agenda, opportunities to take action, and curated news and opportunities.