Protecting our Students in Schools Act of 2026

Programs receiving federal financial assistance could not subject students to deliberate physical pain for discipline. The definition includes striking, spanking, paddling, painful positions, and using chemical sprays, electroshock weapons, or stun guns on a student.

A student or parent could sue a program for attorneys’ fees, expert fees, an injunction, and compensatory damages. The Education Department would refer complaints for investigation and could withhold federal payments, reach a compliance agreement, or seek a cease-and-desist order; the Attorney General could also bring a case after a parent complaint and notice to the program.

After corporal punishment, a program would have to notify the student’s parents, the state education agency, and local law enforcement in writing. For a student with a disability, it would also notify the relevant protection and advocacy system and provide information that system requests.

States would submit assurances about notice and training, along with school-climate reports on discipline policies, approaches to improving school climate, and staff supports. Local education agencies would report information needed by their state; the Education Department would summarize state findings and make the reports public.

The Education Department could award grants to states for training, technical assistance, and developing and evaluating approaches to improve school climate and reduce exclusionary and aversive discipline. States could make competitive subgrants to local education agencies; grant-funded work would prioritize certain schools, including those with high discipline rates or disproportionate effects on students of color or students with disabilities.