Skip to main content

Howard president defends university’s unenrollment decisions, says more than 200 students have been re-enrolled

A sign greets people at the entrance to Howard University on June 5, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Kevin Carter/Getty Images)

(WASHINGTON) — After gaining national attention for unenrolling more than 500 incoming first-year students over missed tuition and financial-aid deadlines, Howard University has reinstated over 200 incoming students, according to the university’s interim president.

In an interview with Stephanie Ramos on ABC News Live on Wednesday, interim President Wayne A.I. Frederick offered new insight into the university’s perspective amid intense backlash from students.

“We looked at students who were able to give us the documentation we were asking for in the first place, such as evidence of an external scholarship, and also students were able to remit payment, and so we took that into consideration despite the fact that it was late,” Frederick said of the decision to re-enroll students.

“Having said that, we have now reviewed all 502 students, and so most of the decisions, if not all of them, have been made,” he continued.

Asked if overenrollment was a contributing factor in the university’s decision-making, Frederick told ABC News that all students who were unenrolled previously had housing assigned to them and that this was not a matter of “bed capacity.”

He said the reason for holding students to the payment deadline is that the university wants to avoid putting students in financial situations that would prevent them from finishing their degree, citing Howard’s four-year graduation rate at under 70%.

“We really are trying to do our best to make sure that when students start, they can finish. And this is part of what we must do on the front end because I think having them leave without a degree and with debt is not the right thing as well,” Frederick explained.

Multiple students who said they were unenrolled spoke with ABC News, saying they do not believe the university communicated with them effectively.

Dwayne Irvin, a 19-year-old from Missouri, told ABC News that he was blindsided by Howard’s decision to unenroll him. He said he had been communicating with the university’s financial aid office about pending outside scholarships and plans to enroll in a payment plan.

“They told me to wait to enroll into that payment plan until that scholarship has been deposited into my account, so my monthly payments could be cheaper. I said, OK, that makes sense. So I went with that route…A week later, I get the email saying I was out,” Irvin said.

Frederick expressed a willingness to improve the university’s communications but defended Howard’s actions.

“Over 2,200 students, families did exactly what we expected them to do and followed the policies and procedures and met the deadline, which means that I feel that our communication was pretty comprehensive,” Frederick said, adding, “We certainly need to recognize that we have to enhance our communications and really support our students even more.”

Nikiyah Clark, a 17-year-old from Ohio who was set to enroll at Howard as a first-year this fall, said she was told by the university that she was not permitted to re-enroll this year. She said she had missed a tuition payment deadline, but told ABC News that she had only received notice of the deadline the day it was due.

“I tried to hold back tears as I walked out of the building. I tried to compose myself, but I couldn’t. I was so sad. I was very hurt,” Clark said, adding “It was a very disheartening situation, considering the fact that I worked so incredibly hard to get to earn my place at the university.”

Frederick told ABC News that the university will hold enrollment space in next year’s class, and transfer and deferral opportunities for unenrolled students.

“We will still make every attempt to keep those students within the Howard family,” he said.

Those new enrollment processes have not yet been publicly detailed by Howard.

Irvin said he had been told about these options, but will not be re-enrolling. However, the family of Mason Farmer, another student who was unenrolled, told ABC News that the university had told them there was no more space for him to enroll this fall.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Cruz calls for arming Iran’s protesters: ‘Our objective should be regime collapse’

▶ Watch Video: Sen. Cruz calls for Trump to arm Iranian protesters: "Our objective should be regime collapse" With the U.S.-Iran conflict in its sixth month, the Trump administration is angling for a deal. But Republican Sen. Ted Cruz argues the U.S. should heap more pressure on Iran's regime — including by arming Iranians who oppose their government."I think our objective should be regime collapse," the Texas Republican told CBS News national security analyst and Free Press columnist Aaron MacLean on the "School of War" podcast.Cruz first pushed for the U.S. to arm protesters in late January, after Iran cracked down on the country's largest wave of demonstrations in years, killing at least 12,000 people, sources told CBS News.A month later, the U.S. and Israel began striking Iran. The stated goal was to degrade Iran's conventional military and nuclear program, but President Trump also urged ordinary Iranians to "take over your government" and oust the hardline clerical regime that has ruled Iran since 1979.Since then, the U.S. and Iran have oscillated between strikes and diplomacy. The two countries struck a memorandum of understanding in June aimed at halting the conflict, restoring shipping traffic, launching negotiations over Iran's nuclear program and eventually loosening sanctions on Iran. The agreement collapsed last month, but Iran is now inching toward a deal with Oman to allow shipping traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, which could allow U.S.-Iran talks to resume.Cruz has criticized many of the U.S.'s diplomatic overtures toward Iran. He told MacLean the memorandum of understanding was a "disaster" and a "terrible deal," warning it would set the stage for Iran to get billions of dollars in sanctions relief and $300 billion in economic development funds, and could let Iran assume "a permanent role with the Strait of Hormuz.""You'll forgive me if I'm not terribly eager to give them $300 billion to facilitate their carrying out their stated intent of murdering us," Cruz said. "Giving them $300 billion is an exceptionally bad idea. It was a bad idea two months ago, it's a bad idea today and it would be a bad idea two months from now. So I hope we don't go down that road."(The Trump administration said in June the $300 billion in reconstruction funds would be voluntary, and would come from Gulf states and private investors, not the U.S. government.)Instead, Cruz argued, the U.S. should keep striking Iranian military targets and should "continue ratcheting up the economic pressure," including by keeping in place a blockade on Iranian ports designed to choke off Iran's ability to sell its oil.And he called for Iranians to be armed. "What I believe we should do, what I have urged President Trump repeatedly, what I've urged Israel to do repeatedly, is arm the protesters, give them the guns, to let them overthrow their own government so that it's not American boots on the ground, it's Iranians fighting for their own country," the senator said.In recent months, Mr. Trump has backed off his calls for Iran's regime to be toppled. And Cruz acknowledged that calls for "regime change" can carry negative connotations, evoking comparisons to the chaos that resulted after the U.S. toppled Iraq's Saddam Hussein.Cruz said he doesn't "particularly care who comes next" if Iran's regime were to collapse."I don't have a dog whether it's the son of the Shah, whether it is the [Mojahedin-e-Khalq opposition group], whether it is someone local, as long as they are not an Islamist who hates America and is actively trying to kill Americans," Cruz said, referring to exiled crown prince Reza Pahlavi, whose father was overthrown as Iran's shah, or king, in 1979.Mr. Trump, for his part, said in March he wanted a role in choosing Iran's next leader. He has expressed doubts about Pahlavi, saying earlier this year he "seems very nice," but: "I don't know how he'd play within his own country."Cruz is far from the only Republican to question the idea of striking a deal with Iran. Shortly after the U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding was announced in mid-June, Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana called it "the worst foreign policy blunder in decades," and Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas warned that parts of it are a "step in the wrong direction."Mr. Trump called critics of the deal "fools" and "either jealous, bad people, or stupid."Meanwhile, a handful of Republicans — like Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky — have criticized the president's entire Iran strategy , arguing the war itself was a mistake.The disagreements about Iran could expose a broader rift within the GOP between those who tend to favor expansive uses of U.S. military force and those who are more skeptical of it. At the center of the dispute is Vice President JD Vance, a possible successor to Mr. Trump who helped lead U.S.-Iran negotiations and has historically been a skeptic of military action. In an interview last month on Joe Rogan's podcast, Vance broadly defended the administration's strategy and expressed frustration with Iran "hawks.""I'm very frustrated by the Americans and, frankly, by people in other countries who are like, 'You cannot negotiate with the Iranians,'" he said. "Well, then, what is your proposal to get people to stop shooting at ships in the Strait of Hormuz? You can bomb them, you can take away their radar, you can take away some of their drones and some of their missiles, but it's just too easy to fire at ships in the strait. So you've got to actually be willing to talk and to try to figure out the problem."Cruz told MacLean he doesn't view himself as an interventionist."I disagree with both the interventionist and the isolationists. I think the interventionists are too quick to send the Marines. That's their solution for everything," he said. "But I am most definitely not an isolationist. It is a dangerous world, and it is our military's job to prevent enemies of America from killing Americans."
Read Next Story