More than 170,000 Illinois residents are behind on student loan payments and at risk of having their wages garnished now that the Trump administration has restarted collections on federal loans in default.

The federal government considers loans to be in default when a borrower hasn’t made payments for about nine months. Wage garnishment involves seizing a portion of someone’s paycheck to help cover the cost of their debt.

The action could be disastrous for borrowers who are already having a hard time making ends meet, said Sabrina Calazans, executive director of the Student Debt Crisis Center, a nonprofit focused on helping borrowers.

“This is a really, really bad time for so many folks [who] are struggling,” Calazans said, noting that these collections are intersecting with skyrocketing health care premiums, high unemployment and the increasing cost of groceries and other necessities.

“It just becomes this huge nightmare for so many families,” Calazans said.

The two groups most likely to be impacted are Black borrowers and borrowers with associate degrees, according to a fall 2025 survey by The Institute for College Access and Success.

WBEZ spoke with Calazans and another student debt expert to break down what default and wage garnishment means for borrowers and what actions people with federal student loans can take to prevent that situation — or get out of it.

Why is the federal government withholding wages from some student loan borrowers?

For almost six years, since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, federal officials had opted not to collect on defaulted student loans. But last spring President Donald Trump’s administration announced it would resume wage garnishment in order to recoup taxpayer dollars.

That means that starting again this year, with 30 days notice, the government can work with your employer to seize up to 15% of your disposable income. Critics say the move will only worsen the financial hardships of struggling Americans without decreasing the number of people already in or headed for student loan default.

“It seems like the appropriate thing to do would be to talk to the borrower about, ‘How can I get you in a form of repayment that you can afford,’” said Alexander Lundrigan with Young Invincibles, a nonprofit that advocates for policies benefiting young Americans. “But instead of the hand, it’s the hammer. And that’s just been the approach of this administration.”

More than 5 million borrowers across the country were in default as of April 2025, and another 4 million were more than 90 days behind on payments, according to the U.S. Department of Education. That means more than a quarter of federal student loans could be put into involuntary collections this year.

What happens once I default on my student loan?

The borrower’s entire balance is due and fees get tacked on, Calazans said, which can cause the debt to balloon even more.

“It’s very overwhelming for folks,” she said.

If you go into default you should see a red warning at the top of your StudentAid.Gov dashboard. You may also receive a letter in the mail from the Education Department’s default resolution group, or the company that administers your loan may reach out by phone or email.

Once you reach 360 days of missed payments, your defaulted loans can be sent to collections and you may face wage garnishment or seizure of your federal tax refund.

Already, federal officials say they are notifying 1,000 borrowers in default this month that their wages will be garnished, and that number will ramp up in the coming months.

How do I know if I’m at risk of default?

Before default, there’s delinquency. Miss your payment deadline by just one day and your loans become delinquent, Calazans said.

Once you miss at least 90 days of payments, your delinquent status is reported to major credit bureaus. Taking out a credit card or renting an apartment or buying a home become much more difficult.

“People see their credit scores tank,” Calazans said. “It impacts all aspects of life.”

One way to prevent this is to make sure your contact information is up-to-date in both your loan servicer and Federal Student Aid accounts. That way you don’t miss important communications about payment deadlines and changes to your loan status, including notices about delinquency and default.

This is especially important right now as the federal student loan system undergoes changes and is plagued by a backlog of applications for affordable repayment plans and student loan cancellation, Calazans said.

“The communication to folks has been horrendous,” said Calazans, citing layoffs at the Education Department. “It’s really hard for people to navigate the system.”

A department spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.

What factors could put me at a higher risk of default?

Many Americans are being pushed into default by the increasing cost of housing, food and health care, Calazans and Lundrigan say, and by the Trump administration’s whittling down of student loan repayment options like the SAVE plan, which was the most affordable plan offered.

More than 4 in 10 borrowers surveyed by The Institute For College Access and Success reported having to choose between making loan payments and covering the cost of food, housing and other basic needs.

“There’s an assumption that [people in default] are refusing to pay their student loans, which is not the case most of the time,” Lundrigan said. He said borrowers tell him: “I’m picking between my student loan payment and my rent, and I’m going to pay my rent.”

What should I do if I’m at risk of defaulting on my student loans?

If your loans are delinquent but not yet in default, Calazans advises calling MOHELA, Nelnet, or whichever company administers your loans. (Find that information here). You can request the servicer retroactively apply a forbearance or deferment to the period of time you have missed payments.

“It clears the fact that you were in delinquency, and brings you back to good standing and back to square one,” Calazans said.

You can also use the student loan simulator on the Federal Student Aid website to figure out if there’s a more affordable repayment option available based on your individual financial circumstances, Lundrigan said.

What options do I have if my student loans are already in default?

Unless you are in a position to pay off your entire loan balance and default fees, Calazans said, you should contact your loan servicer and/or the Education Department’s default resolution group as soon as possible — ideally before your loans are moved into collection.

“It’s harder to get that wheel to stop when it’s in motion,” she said.

Your two options are loan rehabilitation or consolidation.

Under the first, the default resolution group comes up with a payment amount that you must make nine times over a 10-month period to bring your loans out of default.

“It’s a lengthy process,” Calazans said. Consolidation “is a much quicker way for you to get out of default.”

By consolidating your loans, you are basically creating a new loan and putting yourself back into good standing, Calazans explained. You can then enroll in an income-driven repayment plan to get back on track.

If you pursue this route, Lundrigan said, you should try to apply and have your loans consolidated before July 1, otherwise you will lose the option to request deferment for unemployment or economic hardship.

What can I do if I receive a notice of wage garnishment?

You can appeal the decision through the federal default resolution group, Lundrigan said, but you have to do so quickly.

If granted a hearing, you will need to present evidence that you’ve recently started a new job, that the debt amount doesn’t exist or is incorrect or that wage garnishment would create extreme financial hardship. Lundrigan said this process may soon change.

Calazans still recommends reaching out to the federal default resolution group to ask about next steps. But she said some people have had trouble getting in touch with the agency.

If that’s the case, she said, Illinois residents should reach out to their student loan ombudsman or contact their representatives in Congress.

“The default resolution group is supposed to help you. This is literally their job,” Calazans said. But if that doesn’t happen, “the lawmaker’s office can intervene and be like, ‘Hey, what’s going on?’”

CHICAGO — Rep. Robin Kelly of Illinois says she has introduced three articles of impeachment to remove Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem from office and that she has support from almost 70 Democrats so far.

A growing number of Democrats are calling for Noem’s impeachment in the wake of the killing of a Minnesota woman by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer, though the effort stands little chance in a Republican-controlled House and Senate.

ABC7 Chicago is now streaming 24/7. Click here to watch

Kelly said in a press conference Wednesday announcing her resolution that “real people are being hurt and killed” from ICE enforcement actions. She was joined by 10 other Democrats at the event who voiced frustration and anger with the Trump administration’s deportation efforts – many focused on their districts.

“If we do nothing, nothing will happen,” Kelly said.

It’s unclear when Kelly may seek to force a vote on her resolution.

RELATED | Minneapolis ICE shooting: Gov. Pritzker calls for DHS Sec. Noem to resign, Chicago groups speak out

Rep. Angie Craig, who represents a swing district in Minnesota, said ICE actions “have crossed a line.”

“Minnesotans, we want safe and secure borders. We want violent criminals to not be in our country. But this is not what we signed up for.”

Voto Latino supports articles of impeachment against Secretary Noem, urges constituents to demand support from elected officials

Voto Latino leaders announced their full support for the three articles of impeachment introduced by Rep. Kelly to remove DHS Secretary Noem.

“The impeachment articles brought forward by Representative Kelly today have been a long time coming,” Voto Latino leaders said in a statement. “Since taking office Secretary Kristi Noem has operated without restraint or accountability. Secretary Kristi Noem has used her cabinet position to benefit herself at the expense of the American people – regardless of immigration status.”

Along with their support, Voto Latino leaders are launching a digital campaign in Republican led districts, aimed at pressuring members of Congress to support the impeachment efforts. The digital campaign urges constituents in the districts to contact their representative and demand support for the impeachment efforts.

Over the last several months, Chicago, Minneapolis and St. Paul have seen a dramatic escalation in federal immigration enforcement along their chilly streets, with agents arresting thousands – including some US citizens – in neighborhoods, shopping centers, schools and at protests.

The surge is the result of the Trump administration’s commitment to cracking down on immigration, concentrated in Democratic-led cities, and follows weeks of growing tensions between the federal government and local Midwestern officials who have long implored for an end to the operations.

Illinois and Minnesota, joined by their city counterparts, are now separately pursuing legal action against the administration, filing lawsuits Monday in federal courts over immigration enforcement they call unlawful and unconstitutional.

A status conference for Minnesota’s complaint is set for Wednesday morning before US District Judge Katherine M. Menendez. A hearing has not yet been scheduled in Illinois.

But the road ahead for both suits appears dim, with their likelihood for success small, one expert says.

Elie Honig, a former federal and state prosecutor and CNN senior legal analyst, has closely followed the turmoil in Chicago and the Twin Cities. Here, he breaks down the lawsuits, their merits and what’s next in the courtrooms.

Some of the answers have been edited for length and clarity.

CNN: What are Illinois and Minnesota asking for from judges in their lawsuits?

Honig: Fundamentally, both of these states are asking federal judges to block Immigration and Customs Enforcement from enforcing immigration law in their states and cities. There are variations between them, but that’s the core ask. As a backup, both states ask the courts for some sort of ruling or declaration that some of the tactics ICE is using are unconstitutional.

CNN: What are the key differences between the lawsuits?

Honig: The main difference is that Illinois asks to block all ICE activity in the state, whereas Minnesota phrases its ask as seeking to stop this “surge” of officers. But pointing to the surge is legally irrelevant, because whether you’re talking about a group of ICE agents who are already there, or who were added after some point, the fundamental ask is still the same. You’re still asking a judge to block ICE from doing its job as it sees fit in your state.

CNN: What is the legal precedent for an ask like that?

Honig: None. There is no example, nor does either state cite an example in their papers, of a judge prohibiting a federal law enforcement agent from enforcing federal law in a given state. The reaction that we’ve heard from various Minnesota officials, including Attorney General Keith Ellison, when confronted with this lack of precedent and lack of case law, is essentially, “Well, this is really bad, though. Well, this is an invasion.” There is plenty of dramatic language in the complaints, but that doesn’t change the legal calculus. You can’t just take a situation that has no legal precedent and no legal support and say, “Well, yes, but our situation is really, really bad, therefore we get to invent new law.”

CNN: In your opinion, how strong do you think the states’ arguments are?

Honig: I think the arguments that both states are making, that ICE should be blocked, either entirely or just the surge, are close to completely meritless. Fundamentally, what they’re asking for is legally completely unwarranted.

CNN: What do you think is the most likely outcome for each suit?

Honig: It’s so dependent on the judge here. But I think the best, realistic scenario for the states is – if they get sympathetic judges who decide to put ICE through its paces – maybe they call in ICE agents as witnesses, or ICE officials as witnesses, probe into ICE’s training, policies and tactics and issue some sort of declaration that ICE needs to do things differently or better. Some sort of window dressing like that is probably the best realistic outcome. There’s no way a judge is going to say, “I hereby block you, ICE, from carrying out enforcement activities.” And if a judge does do that, it’ll be reversed.

CNN: What are the legal principles at play here on the other side?

Honig: First, it’s the Supremacy Clause, which says that the state and local authorities cannot block the feds from carrying out their federal duties. And also Article Two, which gives the federal executive branch the power to enforce federal law. Those are the legal theories that really are in play here.

CNN: If the states’ chances of winning are close to zero, what can be done?

Honig: I’m not saying there’s nothing to be done. This is just not the way to address any abuses or excesses by ICE. If a person has his or her rights violated, if a search is unlawful, if a person is wrongly detained, if a person is injured or killed wrongly by ICE, they can sue. They can go to court and seek specific redress for their specific injuries. What the courts are not supposed to do, first of all, is prohibit the federal executive branch from carrying out federal executive branch prerogatives and, secondly, issue blanket theoretical advisory rulings about the way the world ought to look or ought not to look. Cases need to be about specific injury and specific redress, and these lawsuits are not that.

CNN: Illinois and Chicago sued the Trump administration in October 2025 after it federalized and tried to deploy the Illinois National Guard, also arguing in part that it violated the 10th Amendment. The state was successful in that case and Trump has largely backed off National Guard deployment there for now. What are the key differences between that case and this one over immigration enforcement?

Honig: The National Guard was an entirely different case where Trump used a specific law, Section 12406, to deploy the National Guard. The Supreme Court offered a very specific and nuanced definition of the term “regular forces,” and whether that meant regular law enforcement forces, or regular military forces. So that case was based on the action Trump took that was based on a specific federal statute, and the Supreme Court construed and defined that statute against the Trump administration. Legally, it’s a completely different scenario from what we have here.

CNN: Illinois and Minnesota filed their suits Monday; the latter also filing a temporary restraining order request. What happens now?

Honig: One of two things. One, the judges can just reject these out of hand. I think that’s unlikely. I think the judges are going to want to hear further from the parties. The judges might decide to hold fact-finding hearings, they might decide, “I want to dig into what ICE is doing a bit.” That’s all within the broad discretion of these district court judges. I think those are the next steps, but if a district court judge is to say, “ICE, you can’t go in there, you can’t go into that state, you can’t go into that city,” I think that will get reversed real quick.

CNN: Is there a timeline we can anticipate here for how quickly the judges may act on these lawsuits?

Honig: Judges are in charge of handling their own dockets and calendars. I would assume judges would understand that these are fairly immediate and emergent issues and would want to get the parties in court within days, not months.