President Donald Trump, on the left, addresses the audience as Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Secretary of Health and Human Services, pays attention during a Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission gathering held in the East Room of the White House on Thursday, May 22, 2025, in Washington (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin).
Advocacy groups and the National Head Start Association coalition currently opposing the Trump administration’s “unlawful” attempt to phase out the early childhood education program argue that the government is trying to illegally exclude children without legal status. These groups claim this action will lead to “severe and widespread consequences” for families and children nationwide.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) revealed a “major policy change aimed at restoring adherence to federal law and ensuring that benefits from taxpayer-funded programs, meant for American citizens, are not used to support illegal aliens,” according to a press release issued by HHS last week.
On Monday, the July 14 Immigrant Exclusion Directive formally rescinded a 1998 “interpretation” of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) issued during the Clinton administration, which “improperly extended certain federal public benefits to illegal aliens,” per the HHS.
“For over two decades, the 1998 policy improperly narrowed the scope of PRWORA, undercutting the law by allowing illegal aliens to access programs Congress intended only for the American people,” the agency proclaimed.
“With this update, HHS is complying with the law—ensuring that federal benefits are administered with transparency, legal integrity, and fairness to the American people,” it said.
The American Civil Liberties Union and other advocacy groups suing over the dismantling of the Head Start program announced Tuesday that they were filing a motion to amend their complaint to add the new directive rules and alleged harms they cause.
“The July 14 Immigrant Exclusion Directive is yet another step in Defendants” attempt to hobble the Head Start program in defiance of Congress,” the motion says. “The directive will cause Parent Plaintiffs’ members to lose access to childcare, forcing them to miss work, lose their jobs, drop out of school and training programs, and otherwise jeopardize their ability to care for themselves and their families — inflicting significant economic, social, and health costs at the individual, family, and community levels.”
Reached for comment on Wednesday, HHS press secretary Emily Hilliard told Law&Crime the agency “does not comment on litigation” and cited its press release on the directive.
According to the ACLU’s motion to amend the complaint, the July 14 Immigrant Exclusion Directive will “immediately” cause a decline in attendance and enrollment in Head Start programs, although the ACLU does note that nonprofit charitable organizations remain exempt from screening applicants for immigration status.
“Prior to the July 14 Immigrant Exclusion Directive, HSA Plaintiffs and their members have never screened participants based on immigration status, allowing staff to build the community trust necessary for Head Start recruitment and retention,” the motion says. “Similarly, Parent Plaintiffs have long relied on Head Start’s policy not to screen based on immigration status when educating their members about their early education options and advising them that Head Start programs do not determine eligibility based on immigration status.”
The new directive, the motion alleges, “now effectively requires” nonexempt Head Start agencies to verify applicants’ immigration status and to deny applicants who are not “qualified” immigrants. It also “forces HSA Plaintiffs to abruptly change course” in program implementation and divert limited resources away from “core operational activities” in favor of screening procedures based on immigration status.
“Defendants’ actions disrupt — and are designed to disrupt — the ability of Head Start agencies to provide quality service to children and parents,” the motion concludes. “Defendants have created extraordinary uncertainty in states across the country about whether Head Start agencies will be able to continue operations. The mass purge of program staff and resulting gap in communication and transparency are a sharp departure from past HHS practice on which agencies have long relied.”
A recent version of President Donald Trump’s budget proposes the “complete elimination” of Head Start by Sept. 30, per the ACLU.
