SCOTUS will probably kill student loan relief. But Biden has a backup plan

[Alhena]

On Wednesday, President Joe Biden unveiled his long-awaited plan for student loan forgiveness. For borrowers making under $125,000 a year, the program will cancel $10,000 in student loan debt (and $20,000 for Pell Grant recipients). It will provide relief to 43 million Americans—if five justices on the Supreme Court let it take effect. Will they? The short answer is: probably not. But there’s good news for beneficiaries: The administration may have already identified another way to enact relief if the judiciary stands in the way of Plan A.

If the court chooses this route, though, there’s a straightforward fix: Biden can simply announce that any borrower affected by the pandemic can apply for relief; if they can prove hardship, their debts get canceled. The Heroes Act, of course, says such “case-by-case” adjudication is unnecessary. And this method would increase administrative burdens while shrinking the pool of beneficiaries, since some eligible borrowers will fail to apply. But it would still help millions of people who will be in dire need to support when student loan payments resume in 2023. (There’s a direct analogy to Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe restoring felon voting rights one person at a time after the Virginia Supreme Court wouldn’t let him do it all at once.)

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/08/biden-student-debt-relief-legal-supreme-court.html

[underpants]

1. The author answered the question I was about to ask

One last thing: It’s an open question whether anyone can sue against Biden’s program in the first place. In a persuasive and prescient analysis published this year in the Virginia Law Review, Jack V. Hoover argued that no one has standing to file suit against sweeping loan cancellation. To prove standing, a party would have to demonstrate concrete harm to them, and show how blocking cancellation would remedy that harm. Republicans complain that Biden’s program hurts taxpayers, but under Supreme Court precedent, taxpayers don’t have standing to sue. Former borrowers aren’t directly injured, nor can they show that forcing everybody else to pay off their loans would somehow benefit them. Congress is not allowed to sue just because it disagrees with a president’s interpretation of a statute. State governments aren’t injured, since forgiving federal loans imposes no burden on their finances or sovereignty.

[Alhena]

3. Standing law is a joke in all but the clearest cases. As the article says, when justices want to

hear a case they finesse the standards to allow it, when they don't want to hear it, they do the same. Ironically, normally it's liberal justices who want broad standing rules, and the conservative ones who want narrow rules. The conservatives will have no problem switching sides for this case, though.

[underpants]

7. Thanks.

My real question was - on what basis could someone sue? I know the RW media throws “unconstitutional” around like Trump does with ketchup. I’m just no sure what they think is unconstitutional. Probably nothing really.

[Alhena]

8. Separation of powers violations will be the argument. They will say this forgiveness

is basically the same as spending $300 billion and the Constitution grants spending power to Congress, not the president. Pelosi didn't help matters when she said a year or so ago that Biden clearly lacked the authority to do this.

[underpants]

17. I'm learning so much here

Thanks again.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

9. The argument will be that Congress controls the purse strings

All financial outlays, which includes debt cancellation, must go through Congress first. They will further argue that the Heroes Act provision was never intended for this and cannot be applied en masses. Standing should be a problem, but in reality courts will ignore standing issues if they want to hear the case.

[underpants]

19. Ah!

Thanks

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

5. Standing is just a nice way for courts to pick and choose

What cases they want to hear. If SCOTUS or a lower Federal Court want to block this, they will, regardless of standing. They will just come up with some roundabout logic to justify taking the case. Or they won't, because who is going to stop them from ruling on it?

[Thomas Hurt]

6. Problem is the new Alito Court doesn't give half a dead rat about precedent.

If a legal issue is presented that offends the christofasicsts they will end it. Dobbs was just the beginning.

[SharonClark]

2. Thank you for sharing this article.

It's an excellent explanation of why Biden's actions were legal but also how the QAnon Supremes may try to pull a decision out of their collective ass to thwart him.

[Alhena]

4. That West Virginia v. EPA decision this summer was likely written with this issue in mind

That's how the Republican justices work- they see an issue coming down the pike, make a holding in an intervening case to let them rule how they want to, and then when the issue arrives they say "see, SETTLED LAW prohibits this." In this case, settled as of a month ago. In all honesty, there's no way loan forgiveness will survive the WV v. EPA standard- it was specifically written to limit the Biden administration's authority and that of other Dem administrations.

[in2herbs]

13. The D's inserted a clause in the IRA legislation that was just passed restoring

to Congress the authority the USSC removed from Congressional control under their WV v. EPA decision.

[Initech]

10. It still boggles my mind that the worst president in US history got 3 SCOTUS picks.

Fuck Fox News and fuck the fucking Christian right for doing this to us. May they all rot in hell for this.

[alphafemale]

12. Two of those were stolen.

[Initech]

14. Actually I'd contend all 3 of them were stolen.

Remember when Mitch McDouchebag said that the next president gets to decide the SCOTUS pick after Scalia died? That was a total slap in the face. Mitch knew something was up then that he has never told us.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

11. Not only will not everyone apply

Some who do won’t be able to prove hardship. Anyone who worked through the pandemic and kept making their payments will have a hard time proving that continuing to make them is now a hardship.

[fescuerescue]

15. That's probably how they will get standing.

Find someone who makes $126,000 a year with student loans as the plantive.

Maybe through in an equal protection argument.

[OneGrassRoot]

16. Has the relief not taken effect?

A DUer posted that her child’s loan balances showed it was paid yesterday morning, though she may have been a federal employee. If the forgiveness is being applied, SCOTUS will have huge backlash forcing people to repay. Just like the threat with ACA.

[Fullduplexxx]

18. It's a co equal branch tell them to shove their decision

[LetMyPeopleVote]

20. For this thread

Link to tweet

[Kaleva]

21. I thought people with student debt already were getting relief?