WeVote
Log In

Bill

WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SF 4964

Summary: SF 4964 (2025-2026) — Nondiscrimination and faith-statement restrictions removal on eligible institutions and enrollment options

Note: This summary is based on the bill title, session information, and introductory action history provided. If final text varies, refer to the official bill as enacted or amended for precise provisions.

1) Purpose and intent

  • The bill appears to remove certain nondiscrimination requirements and faith-statement restrictions on eligible institutions and enrollment options within Minnesota.
  • In practical terms, it seeks to modify or eliminate rules that require institutions or schools to enforce nondiscrimination provisions or to mandate adherence to faith-based enrollment criteria as a condition of eligibility or participation in state-funded programs or in certain enrollment options.

2) Key provisions and changes (as implied by title)

  • Nondiscrimination restrictions removal: The bill would roll back or eliminate existing nondiscrimination requirements that apply to eligible institutions. This could affect how institutions grant admissions, enrollment, housing, or services to students, staff, or affiliates, particularly if those institutions have religious or faith-based affiliations or policies.
  • Faith-statement restrictions removal: The bill would remove restrictions tied to faith statements for eligible institutions. This might allow institutions to apply or participate in programs without requiring conformity to specific faith-based statements or to certain faith-based criteria in their admissions or operations.
  • Eligible institutions and enrollment options: The changes would apply specifically to institutions deemed eligible for state programs or funding and to enrollment options available to students under those programs. The bill could broaden eligibility criteria or alter the conditions under which institutions can participate in state-funded initiatives.

3) Who or what would be affected

  • Eligible institutions: Colleges, universities, K–12 academies, or other educational entities that qualify for state programs or funding and that currently operate under nondiscrimination or faith-statement prerequisites.
  • Students and families: Prospective and current students who use enrollment options tied to state programs could be indirectly affected by changes in admission criteria or eligibility of participating institutions.
  • Educational program administrators: State and local education policymakers, as well as administrators overseeing funded programs, would need to adjust compliance, reporting, and oversight to reflect the new rules (or absence of certain rules) regarding nondiscrimination and faith statements.
  • Religious or faith-based institutions: Institutions with religious affiliations may experience changes in how they participate in state programs or enrollment options if such programs previously required adherence to specific nondiscrimination or faith-based criteria.

4) Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Introduction and first reading: The bill was introduced and received its first reading on April 7, 2026.
  • Committee referral: The bill was referred to the Education Policy committee on the same date.
  • Sponsor information: Co-sponsors include Mike Holmstrom, Julia Coleman, Eric Lucero, and Andrew Mathews, indicating broad legislative support across different offices.
  • Next steps (typical): The Education Policy committee would review, possibly hold hearings, and vote to advance the bill. If passed, it would proceed to the floor for additional readings, potential amendments, and votes by the full chamber, followed by the other legislative chamber as applicable.

5) Potential implications to watch

  • Legal and constitutional considerations at the state level, including compliance with existing civil rights and anti-discrimination laws.
  • Impacts on access and diversity in enrollment, especially for institutions that may have religious admissions or faith-based policies.
  • Administrative burden and policy compliance for state-funded programs and the institutions participating in them.
  • Reactions from stakeholders (educational institutions, student advocacy groups, civil rights organizations) and any amendments proposed during the committee process.

If you have access to the bill’s full text, I can provide a more detailed section-by-section analysis, including definitions, exact language changes, and specific fiscal or compliance implications.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.