US Federal House Bill HB3938

US Federal 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 6/11/25
• Refer: 6/11/25

Caption

CLASS Act of 2025

Summary

HB3938, the Court Legal Access and Student Support Act of 2025, would bar the Federal Arbitration Act from applying to enrollment agreements between students and institutions of higher education. In practical terms, that means colleges and universities could not use mandatory arbitration clauses in student enrollment contracts to force disputes out of court. The bill is aimed at preserving students’ ability to bring claims in court rather than being required to resolve them through private arbitration. The bill also amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require participating institutions to refrain from imposing or enforcing contract terms that limit a student’s ability to pursue claims against the institution. The prohibited limits include restrictions on choice of law, jury trial rights, venue, and the ability to bring claims individually or collectively. The bill would take effect one year after enactment.

Impact

If enacted, the bill would change the legal framework governing student-institution contracts by removing federal arbitration enforcement for enrollment agreements and by adding a new federal compliance condition for higher education institutions under the Higher Education Act. Institutions of higher education, as defined in the Higher Education Act, would be prohibited from requiring students to waive court access or related procedural rights as a condition of enrollment. The measure would likely affect admissions and enrollment contracts, dispute resolution policies, and institutional risk management practices across colleges and universities.

Sentiment

The bill’s introduction suggests support from a group of Democratic sponsors focused on student rights and access to the courts. No committee transcripts or votes are available, so there is no recorded debate or roll-call evidence in the provided material. Based on the text alone, the bill appears to be framed as a consumer- and student-protection measure, with its proponents likely emphasizing fairness, transparency, and accountability in higher education contracts.

Contention

The main point of contention is likely to be whether colleges and universities should be allowed to require arbitration or other contractual limits on student lawsuits. Supporters would view the bill as protecting students from forced arbitration and preserving access to jury trials and collective legal action, while opponents may argue it increases litigation exposure for institutions and limits contractual freedom. Another likely issue is federal preemption and the extent to which Congress should override private dispute-resolution agreements in the higher education context.