Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(107,112 posts)
Tue Feb 28, 2023, 09:53 PM Feb 2023

Supreme Court conservatives may want to block student loan forgiveness. But they've hit a snag

Opinion by Harry Litman

Oral arguments before the Supreme Court on Tuesday in a much-watched student loan forgiveness case, Biden vs. Nebraska, pitted two of the conservative majority’s beloved legal doctrines against one another.

The case for striking down President Biden’s program, which would forgive about $400 billion in federal student loan obligations, turns on the court’s recently minted “major questions” doctrine. That doctrine, whose legal provenance is questionable and whose contours are still very much being worked out, holds that for “major” questions of “vast economic or political significance,” the court requires a clear statement of congressional intent rather than deferring to executive branch interpretations of the law.

-snip-

The Biden administration did so under a provision of the pandemic-era Heroes Act authorizing the president to “waive or modify” “any provision” of the student loan program in the case of an emergency. The Trump administration used that provision to suspend loan repayment obligations at the height of the COVID contagion. The program at issue took the further step of broad forgiveness to realize Biden’s campaign promise to reduce American student debt, which exceeds even our total credit card debt.

But the court’s right wing has a dilemma. It became clear during the arguments that perhaps the strongest point in the Biden administration’s favor concerns legal standing, another matter close to the conservatives’ hearts. The court has insisted on strictly policing the constitutional requirement that the federal judiciary may hear only those cases in which the plaintiff has sustained an “injury in fact” — a concrete, particular harm.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/column-supreme-court-conservatives-may-want-to-block-student-loan-forgiveness-but-they-ve-hit-a-snag/ar-AA1844di

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Supreme Court conservativ...