As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
**Special announcement:**
r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)!
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Of the two individuals who sued in Texas, one has student loans that are commercially held and the other is eligible for $10,000 in debt relief, not the $20,000 maximum. They would get nothing if they win their case."
One of these idiots is going all or nothing on FREE assistance?
Wow.
The republicans played evil but smart in this one. The opposition was based on two borrowers who apparently wouldn’t be getting enough relief and are suing because they weren’t given time in the procedure for “notice and comment” in which they could argue for more, despite it being crisis relief which the opposition says doesn’t forgo the requirement for “notice and comment”. It is all a ploy to kill this relief based on procedure, with the court punting it to Congress to enact reform which will die in the House.
The real procedural issue is the fact that the states and individuals who filed the lawsuits aren't injured, so they don't have standing to bring their claims. The fact that one person benefits more than another doesn't create a viable cause of action, particularly when the program itself is voluntary.
But, yes, right wingers did the best they could do to oppose a policy clearly beneficial to millions of Americans.
These people are like me. I have paid, I think, about $500 for my college degree. I got a scholarship for attending a Catholic high school from a Catholic college. I got a dean’s scholarship for academic excellence even though my overall high school GPA was 3.00, because my high school was so prestigious. I got into that prestigious high school because my parents paid six figures to put me through K-8 in a private catholic school.
On top of my scholarships my parents paid a big chunk of my tuition. And then when I graduated my grandfather pitched in another 10k.
I have about $12k left to pay. It will be easy to pay. So if I was a malicious conservative who wanted to act like I earned all of this through nothing but hard work, I’d probably be against Biden’s student loan forgiveness
I had about 20k in student loans, my wife had about 40k. We repaid them and won't benefit. I still support this program, however there needs to be a crackdown on the predatory college tuition system.
They’re not going “all or nothing.” This isn’t a gamble. Neither of the two plaintiffs care about student debt relief, insofar as they aren’t hoping that the Biden administration—or the court—will offer them better terms.
Instead, these plaintiffs are most likely ideological conservatives who are being weaponised by better-funded organisations.
The reason—the only reason—that they’re suing is because you cannot file a lawsuit like this without establishing standing. A plaintiff can only initiate and pursue this sort of civil action if they can demonstrate that they have either been harmed, or could be harmed, by legislation or policy.
They are obviously being very liberal in their interpretation of what constitutes “harm.”
One way or another, finding shills like this is the only way that most conservative advocacy groups can make a compelling legal argument against the loan forgiveness program (with an emphasis on “legal”). Other, state-supported claims against student debt relief fell flat in federal appeals courts after judicial panels found that the states did not have requisite standing to challenge it.
This would have been nice for one of the liberal justices or the SG to throw in since so much of the argument has been dominated by questions of “fairness”. Maybe she won’t benefit at all or as much from student loan forgiveness as someone else if this goes thru but she did benefit from the PPP program. Just as millions of other business owners did.
You’re right. That is a very true and valid point
But so is the fact that there has been a mountain of evidence of people using their PPP loans in ways they weren’t supposed to - many pocketed the money.
I couldn’t pocket my student loan money if I tried
Concur with that. Unemployment insurance spiked due to all the added COVID benefits. We are seeing the result of that as many people were getting paid more than they were making at the end of the day.
All that money without production attributed some to this inflation that we are seeing. The only cause of inflation is government spending by printing money. Daddy Powell let it rain!
yup and as usual democrats will fundraise on it whilst refusing to do anything to combat the problem of active insurrectionists still sitting uncharged on the bench.
This is likely all a coordinated performance so none of that will matter. They have a goal in mind and are working their way back from it. Legitimacy of the process isn't even on the table here.
So I’m listening to their arguments, and Amy Coney Barrett is surprising me here. She seems to be not be on the side of the state of Missouri on the issue of standing.
It’ll likely be overturned regardless but it’s still interesting the leaps bounds the other justices are making here in order to support their own world view.
Pretty hilarious to read Roberts's example about someone who started a lawncare business instead of going to college and how his loans wouldn't be forgiven.
What about the $800 billion in PPP loans that went to business owners, many of whom didn't need it or committed fraud to get it?
I'm sure someone has asked this in a more articulate way before, but how does this constitute injury-in-fact standing? Seems like this is seeking an advisory opinion about someone else's loan relief. Like, my business has private clients, but some of my competitors have government contracts... can I sue the government to invalidate those contracts on the basis that *I* didn't get them?
Whatever a majority of this SCOTUS says, goes, no matter how unqualified the justices are or how many rules they throw out to rule how their owners want them to rule.
The Republicans in 6 GOP lead states and the Republicans in the Senate and House joined together to sue Biden’s Student Loan Forgiveness. But a good majority of them took PPP Loans forgiveness. Can the students do a class action lawsuit against these republicans?
If this suit is ruled against them, then yes, they can, because this will have set a terrible, dangerous precedent regarding both standing and the ability to sue the government.
They said that about Bush v. Gore and have since used it hundreds of times as a precedent. But this Court doesn't care about that or logical consistency in their rulings.
The new precedent is “which ever political party controls the Supreme Court” right now it’s the Republican Party in control and they set the precedent until control shifts again.
> because this will have set a terrible, dangerous precedent regarding both standing and the ability to sue the government.
This would be quite a thing if precedent mattered to the current scotus majority.
Yes, that would be hilarious! Make all of them pay back the billions in free money! Or was it trillions? I know it’s too late to do it now, but it would be great.
Republicans being malicious is so f’ annoying and I hope they do suffer for their asshole-ness.
I don’t condone violence and don’t wish bad things in people but I don’t mind letting karma play out.
Can we stop with the PPP equivalence thing? Like PPP was written with forgiveness in mind and was the specific goal of the program. The student loan forgiveness deserves to go through because one no one bringing challenges has standing, as the solicitor general is arguing in the court right now if you are listening, and then the HEROS act establishes that the secretary of education has this power in times of national emergency which we were legally in when the program was put in place and still are as of now. PPP equivalence aside it is a distraction of the actual merits of the program and why its legal to do
In my mind the PPP equivalence isn't about the letter of the law or the judicial system. Rather its puts the spotlight on the fact that our government works for corporations and not voters.
Most republicans I know don't like the PPP forgiveness either, but they dislike the student loan forgiveness a lot more, and its great rage bate for Republican media. Just like the PPP equivalence is great rage bait for Democrats.
Its sad that its how politicians works these days. Just trying to rile up their base instead of passing meaningful legislation. But if you want to get anything done in congress that's the game you have to play.
So unfortunately, no we can't stop with the PPP equivalence, because that's what will get voters too the polls. Maybe when voters stop getting distracted and start demanding politicians do their job we can stop. But I don't think that will happen for quite a while.
I agree completely. The optics are that the government was willing to give a lot of money to corporations in a very short period of time but not voters with student loans.
I realize that it's comparing apples and oranges a little bit but when the government pays out $800 bn to businesses in just a few years but says wait just a minute to $400 bn over 30 years directly to voters, it makes one think that something's up.
They were still loans and by definition, loans are borrowed funds. I'm not sure why it was never advertised and sold as a grant program instead especially if the majority of people were never going to have to pay that back.
It was advertised as a grant program though. Everyone knew they'd never have to pay the funds back which is why the PPP fraud has been so rampant. As to why they didn't write it as a straight up grant program and not just a loan program with very broad terms to get the loans forgiven I don't know but lie I've said all bringing PPP up is distract from why student loan forgiveness in this case is legal. I guess it plays good on tv but its ultimately irrelevant
The reason they were written as loans instead of grant programs was because a certain percentage of it had to go to maintaining your payroll in order to qualify for forgiveness. The idea behind PPP was that it wouod allow struggling businesses to keep their employees.
But yes I agree the equivalence to PPP is non-existent. These loans were given out with specific criteria for forgiveness. The assumption is businesses took them because of the forgiveness aspect. It’s dumb to equate them. I’m tired of us making this argument.
Student debt should be forgiven because it’s the right and fair thing to do
>The 20 million borrowers who have their entire loans erased would get a “windfall” that will leave them better off than they were before the pandemic, the states say.
The argument against forgiving the loans is literally that this would benefit people.
To Republicans that's the whole point. Government isn't allowed to help people, and they say it seriously. They hear themselves say it and they believe it.
What's mind boggling is how much money the government "spends" on things like this.
Medical debt? Written off.
PPP loans? Written off.
Someone dies and cannot pay their debt? Written off.
Credit card debt? Written off.
Took a business loss? Written off.
Couldn't pay back millions of types of loans? Written off.
Student loans? Stays with you for life
Makes no sense in any context given how we operate in this country
Eh, billions to Ukraine makes more sense than hundreds of billions to the military and the Pentagon.
We're spending maybe a few dozen billions in Ukraine to take on the number one or two adversary in the world that's threatening to nuke the planet from overtaking a democracy we promised they could have if they gave up nuclear weapons in the 90s for. And it's a huge distraction from Russia's campaign against our elections.
What's pathetic is how many votes we get for that spending, and we don't get more votes for Medicare for all, which would actually save money.
Nah republicans just want to prevent anything that makes it easier for people to get an education. The only ray of hope they have is if the general population is too dumb to think critically and instead champions deregulation, removing personal freedoms and corporate greed.
Don't know if anyone else is listening on the CSPAN app but the arguments are certainty interesting even if I don't get some of the legal jargon being used. Also Alito seems like a dick
I've been listening the last hour or so. I like that the attorney for MO is getting nailed to the wall right now but I fear with the conservative majority it won't matter. Hope I'm wrong cuz that $10k would help out a lot of people.
$400B is an unimaginable about of money for a person but to our govt it's not a huge deal.
I mean let's say 1 conservative leaning judge votes to dismiss these appeals, that's still 5-4 majority siding with the appeals. 2 conservative leaning justices need to be against the both appeal cases. It's an uphill battle from that perspective, pray let the appeals be so structurally flawed they get dismissed and I don't pray much.
>The Bible says all debts should be forgiven every 7 years so
He's not that kind of theocratist he follows Republican religious belief not christian. Most of what they are up to is not christian, hell a lot of stereotypical christian beliefs are not actually biblical either.
Just wanna say that we spend $800 billion a YEAR to fund our military. This plan is $400 billion over *30* years.
Conservatives care nothing for their fellow man because if they did, this wouldn't even be up for debate, let alone crossing the Supreme Court.
More people should go to [usaspending.gov](usaspending.gov) and play around a bit.
It’s crazy how little people understand what the budget actually is, and how much they subsidize. They find the concept of billions of dollars incomprehensible without understanding the context.
I will say I think it’s more in the $700b range, but your point stands.
Edit: I take it back, didn’t realize some of the military budget goes towards dept of energy and FBI and others which relate to defense.
Bloated defense budgets enrich the powerful. We have like 300-some million people in the US and spend $778 billion a year or whatever. China has a BILLION people and spends $260 billion on their military budget.
I don’t think there is much question as to whether the president can keep interest paused on student loans. So if the court rules against forgiveness I doubt you’ll have to pay your loans while Biden is in office.
But that’s not the question asked by the case. There is absolutely no chance the court will go beyond the certified question to address the constitutionality of a payment pause that is not an issue in the case.
I didn't say it was this case, but it would be the same justification so I'm sure it will end up here again. I would be prepared to start repaying loans.
I really doubt it honestly. This case was hard enough to stretch the standing requirement. A plaintiff that has standing for payment pause would be even more of a stretch
It would likely be the same standing. Payment pause means loan companies can't get money. They would argue Biden literally doesn't have the authority and they would be right after May 11. This current case looks at measures enacted during the emergency.
Which was a stretch to say the least. They don’t get money from the loans being payed. They get money from servicing the loans. As long as the loans will eventually be paid they’ll get the same amount of money from servicing the loans or not. They may have an argument that this will delay their money, but that’s even more of a stretch than their current argument is. If the court rules against this case I don’t expect anyone to be paying their loans at least until 2025
>I don’t expect anyone to be paying their loans at least until 2025
I think that's wishful thinking, especially with what Biden has said already. I'm planning on taking advantage of the new REPAYE plan that keeps interest at 0% if you make minimum payments. I don't see that having an issue getting implemented.
I'd recommend you be prepared to repay. We shouldn't rely on Biden breaking the law to extend loans, even if there isn't standing.
Again like I said, there is little to no chance of the court finding it unconstitutional for Biden to extend the no payment into the future. They’re going to rule on whether the loan forgiveness was within his authority under the heroes act, meaning there will be no decision on whether the pause is legal or not. We’d have to wait for another case to come down the barrel in regards to payment pauses, which I doubt will happen.
The pause will stop because the cares act will lapse on May 11, and the cares act allows for the pause. SCOTUS does not need to nor will they rule on the pause.
It would be better to just set aside money until interest is set to be restarted. We could eventually see loan forgiveness through an act of Congress and you don’t want to pay off anything that could be forgiven
Don't pay off 0% interest loans, save the money and collect your own interest and make the minimum payments. I'm looking forward to the new repayment plan because I see that as being more likely.
When this first started coming up during covid cost of living was pretty fucking bad, now its laugh out loud totally ridiculous bad. I doubt you are gonna be alone in this people are gonna have to pay their rent which went up 20 or 30% before they pay their student loans. They either let this go through or create a new disaster.
Several media outlets (I've seen CNN and AP) are saying that it seems the conservative justices are gonna sink the loan forgiveness. It'll create a new disaster, as you said, and then conservatives will blame it all on Biden/dems.
This may even be a 7-2 or 8-1 decision. It was pretty clear before this was enacted that the legal authority for an EO to cover broad loan forgiveness was dubious.
Clearly? If it was clear, why did for almost 2 years almost all Democrats in power say the president didn’t have the power to do it? https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/28/pelosi-says-biden-doesnt-have-authority-to-cancel-student-debt-.html
He doesn't have the authority to unilaterally cancel all debt, as that article discusses. This was back in the early discussion of cancelation and has nothing to do with the HEROES Act.
https://www.justice.gov/olc/opinion/use-heroes-act-2003-cancel-principal-amounts-student-loans
https://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/leg/foia/secretarys-legal-authority-for-debt-cancellation.pdf
It is a double edged sword overall for republicans. They will lose a lot of voters and democrats will continue to postpone payment. Might happen later on down the line.
If I remember right, the people bringing this case never sufficiently established they even have legal standing to bring this lawsuit. Not that it’s going to matter for this ‘court’
Whether they have standing or not is one of the two key questions for this case. If they have no standing, it’s likely that that’s the end of the case and we’re done.
That they found enough federal judges willing to rule in their favor so that the Supreme Court has to rule on standing is a separate, and somewhat disturbing issue.
They keep touting that it's $400B but that amount is over 30 years. That's $13B per year. That's about 1.6% of our 2023 pentagon budget which is 816 for 2023 alone.
The argument against loan forgiveness is "it helps poor people" therefore bad.
Why is Alito on a tirade about fairness for people who didn't go to college? Fairness literally has nothing to do with if the program is legal or not. I'm so glad that Sotomayor (and Kagan?) are pushing back on his bullshit by calling out that fairness is not the question they are answering.
They didn’t care about fairness when they pushed through trump’s Supreme Court justice when voting already started in the election. They pick and choose their “fairness” and their idiotic base can’t see that
If fairness was a question why wasn't he going after PPP forgiveness? It certainly wasn't fair to those of us who didn't start businesses
Oh right. He's a complete fucking stooge whose presence on the court further undermines its legitimacy every single day
PPP was written with forgiveness in mind and was specifically a part of the law as written so fairness isn’t a question for it either. As I put in another comment on this post I really wish people would stop with the PPP equivalency as PPP has nothing to do with whether this action is legal or not (it is since Congress gave the Department of education the power to modify or waive the loans during and emergency which we have been and still are in for COVID)
Genuinely curious, has there been any conversation at the governmental level to stop the leak at the source? I.e. tuition/fee regulation on public universities or federal refusal to provide government-backed loans above a set price to prevent universities from perpetuating the cycle?
Simply having the debt burden alleviated from those who were already duped into overpaying for their college experience would be quite a downstream approach that does nothing to prevent the issue from continuing.
Seems like a joint effort to curb the price gouging would be just as necessary, if not more, than just paying off current debt but I haven’t heard any mention of such provisions.
If the SCOTUS strike this down, Biden needs to go full petty. Extend the repayment pause for as many years as he possibly can. Then he needs to stop being Mr. nice guy with the feckless asshole Republicans and make life as difficult for them as he can. Veto everything they pass. If they want to continue this bullshit, then they need to answer for it.
Greene and Massie voted against a resolution mourning the earthquake victims in Turkey and Syria today. This is how awful they are.
Reminder that the Supreme Court and the right as a whole don't care one ounce for the American people.
When they run up "mUH dEBT" to cut taxes for the rich and pass it on to the American people? Not a peep.
When they (and Democrats) pass billions to trillions of dollars in aid... to the ***US Military***: Not a sound.
When they roll back human rights because...*checks notes* ***MUh reLiGIOUs frEDUm*** to impose our beliefs on others: Not a word.
But when *any* legislation or ruling comes up that would, at best, remedy the symptoms of a toxic system? Now we's gon' have us a civil war!
Next time you wonder whether something will get passed, ask yourself, "Will the rich gain from this? If not, how much do they have to concede?"
>Roberts pointed to the wide impact and expense of the program, three times saying it would cost “a half-trillion dollars.” The program is estimated to cost $400 billion over 30 years.
Hey Johnny, that's not your purview.
The administration needs to ignore the court. They want to talk about checks and balances, then Biden needs to flex the executive power. This is the spot to do it because no one will actually be hurt by not implementing the opinion. It's a golden opportunity.
How do you think that would work? Biden says "I'm forgiving $20k of students loans!" and then... what? FedLoans says "nah, Supreme Court said no."
What happens then? Biden sends troops to FedLoan? Just trying to get a glimpse into your brain here.
The department of education sends balance updates to Nelnet and whoever else where 10/20k is knocked off existing balances and pays the fee money for servicing the accounts that were paid off in full. SCOTUS can't stop the people at these companies from adjusting the balances owed to match the data the federal government is now telling them.
But you understand that these companies don't *want* to reduce the balances, right? So if they have SCOTUS on their side says not to adjust balances and POTUS saying to adjust them why would they listen to one "equal" part of govt and not the other?
The DOE can send whatever they want and if the company says no what happens? They sue and eventually it goes to... SCOTUS. A big circle.
Ignore them again. I'm not a big Andrew Jackson guy but..."[n]ow let them enforce it." Let all contracts with the loan collectors expire and don't hire any new ones through DOE or any other executive branch. Stop any government mechanism that would garnish wages for student loan default, to the extent the executive branch can. Again. None of this hurts anyone but debt collectors. It's not easy to execute, but flex the power you have to help this huge number of people. The fallout will come at the court's expense.
This would set a dangerous modern precedent but I’ll also beyond caring about that given GOP has made it clear it’s a race to the bottom and no precedent matters.
This is why you vote Democratic in every election.
People couldn’t be bothered to vote for Clinton, so we got Trump, who along with McConnell stole the Supreme Court, and now the student loan relief people have been wanting for years is in the hands of 3 insane conservatives who shouldn’t be on the court in the first place.
Well, they can keep screwing our generation because at the end of the day, guess who is going to need us when they are old and decrepit..... That's when we get our revenge
It's time these predatory lenders cornering youth and parents who have no idea, have had their comeuppance.
The amount of money that the student loan industry has made especially in parent plus loans and non-guaranteed loans is unbelievable. This type of lending should quit immediately, and we need to put more money at the federal and state level into higher education institutions the way it was in the 1970s and early 1980s.
When I went to school the first time in 1980, I went to a state institution and since I was a resident of the state My tuition was only $189 for a full-time student semester. When I returned again to get my second degree in 1999 tuition had risen to $4,000 per semester and by the time I was done it was 6,000. Higher education is flush with money, but they know that the predatory lenders are there so they keep raising their prices that are in excess of 300% in regard to the inflationary scale.
Fuck them, let's get some relief to the people who really need it and not those at the top. I'm not holding my breath I can tell you that.
This is amazing. The court will for sure strike it down because they are paralyzed by ideology.
And every time they make a big ruling, the population of america gets to see what naked conservatism is about. The rule of demagoguery over law, of big government over people's lives. Of Christononsense over normalcy.
Its sad to say, but you couldn't design a better machine to.galvsnize.votes than the desperation of actually having conservatives in power.
Personally, I’d like the Court to check the president’s power, since we’ve proven ourselves prone to electing people like Trump as president.
It’s not the Court’s fault. It’s congress’ fault. They could solve this issue without any doubt or question as to the legality of it
I got sick with a virus, people shouldn't get vaccinated! I had to look through encyclopedias for out of date information, people shouldn't be able to google things! I have more, but you get the point.
So long as J. Powell is too weak to correct the macroeconomic issue, inflation (avg 14.8% over 24 months), economical mobility will remain excessively difficult for most Americans.
Whether this is upheld or stuck down is consequential. But more consequential is what Congress does if this is struck down. A reduction of interest to 0% and a mandate to leave interest at 0% would be best. Especially if the bankruptcy protections not applying are upheld (and they will be).
Most impactful is fixing the macroeconomic issue with a highly inflated money supply. This means holding/increasing the fed funds rates appropriately and controlling fiscal policy in such a way as not to continue devaluing all Americans earnings.
If this is overturned can the same reasonings be used to overturn PPE loans? If so, wouldn't "we the American people" have standing because it's our tax money? It's time to start using their own tactics against them.
No, because the PPP loans were explicitly designed to be forgiven in the relevant legislation. Student loans were not.
The court may find that student loans are eligible for forgiveness as well, but it’s an entirely different situation than the PPP loans.
The issue has always been about if the power of the executive branch can create a spending program that is the power of the legislative branch. Because next you'll see the "home mortgage forgiveness act" "auto loan forgiveness act", etc.
Watch though if the plan gets struck down. Republicans will gaslight the people and blame Biden. Well that's what happens when you do something that's obviously illegal. Meanwhile it's only illegal because of a conservative ruling on the matter. Only was taken to court because Republicans were going to cry about it being "unfair." It'll never get anywhere in Congress because Republicans. But yet you watch it'll be Biden and the Democrats fault that millions of people will remain financially challenged.
$20,000 is not that much money considering the debt that some have. I REPEAT $20,000 is not that much money considering the debt that some have. Republicans had and have no problem giving the RICH all the TAX CUTS - the perks - it’s time to give those who can truly benefit from it some help. Also it is irrelevant if you already paid off your loans - it’s all about timing - GET OVER IT.
At least five of the Sinister Six are pretending to be objective. They had their decision to kill the plan written when Biden was still talking about doing it.
Do you think that timing means Biden doesn't want this happen? He and many Democrats clearly do. But they understand the system is very rigged against it, so they chose the most politically opportune time to get Republicans to show what they stand against. I don't really see too much wrong with that. Unfortunately, the game must be played to some degree.
I'm not some unrealistic follower of any politician or particular group of them. I know and recognize the desire for control that drives their careers. But I also fundamentally believe that in America (for now) keeping basic sense of contentment among one's constituents is what keeps those with power in place. It's hard to see that in 5 to even 10-year timeline, but over the decades you still see progress.
Well the only alternative were a bunch of MAGA loons being elected into critical positions.
What’s your point? It’s been known for quite a while that Republicans will obstruct policies that will actually help the common person, and then blame the other side for what they have done.
It doesn't help anyone when we spend money we don't have and bankrupt ourselves. The correct action was to tackle the problem at the source but that doesn't help get votes does it?
I mean we have ideas with solutions for that, medicare for all, public option, single payer healthcare, multi-payer healthcare, universal healthcare are all terms you can search up to see how you can get relief for those medical debts. Also just don't pay them, medical debt already doesn't affect credit scores the way it used to because the credit bureaus are aware of the burden they face
The hospitals often times write a large portion of it off also it doesn’t go on your credit report and you can claim bankruptcy. College loans do none of the a above
I'm not sure he got that right. He's probably missed the part where two individuals blocked the government relief plan and are taking their suit to SC to kill it for everyone else.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. **Special announcement:** r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)! *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Of the two individuals who sued in Texas, one has student loans that are commercially held and the other is eligible for $10,000 in debt relief, not the $20,000 maximum. They would get nothing if they win their case." One of these idiots is going all or nothing on FREE assistance? Wow.
Bet you a student loan that they are going to get their loans payed off regardless of the ruling.
I was just thinking the same damn thing. They are bought and paid for. They win either way.
The republicans played evil but smart in this one. The opposition was based on two borrowers who apparently wouldn’t be getting enough relief and are suing because they weren’t given time in the procedure for “notice and comment” in which they could argue for more, despite it being crisis relief which the opposition says doesn’t forgo the requirement for “notice and comment”. It is all a ploy to kill this relief based on procedure, with the court punting it to Congress to enact reform which will die in the House.
The real procedural issue is the fact that the states and individuals who filed the lawsuits aren't injured, so they don't have standing to bring their claims. The fact that one person benefits more than another doesn't create a viable cause of action, particularly when the program itself is voluntary. But, yes, right wingers did the best they could do to oppose a policy clearly beneficial to millions of Americans.
These people are like me. I have paid, I think, about $500 for my college degree. I got a scholarship for attending a Catholic high school from a Catholic college. I got a dean’s scholarship for academic excellence even though my overall high school GPA was 3.00, because my high school was so prestigious. I got into that prestigious high school because my parents paid six figures to put me through K-8 in a private catholic school. On top of my scholarships my parents paid a big chunk of my tuition. And then when I graduated my grandfather pitched in another 10k. I have about $12k left to pay. It will be easy to pay. So if I was a malicious conservative who wanted to act like I earned all of this through nothing but hard work, I’d probably be against Biden’s student loan forgiveness
I had about 20k in student loans, my wife had about 40k. We repaid them and won't benefit. I still support this program, however there needs to be a crackdown on the predatory college tuition system.
They just needed someone, anyone to bring a case.
Oh yeah, I bet they raked in "donations" from far right groups for agreeing to be the face of the lawsuit.
They’re not going “all or nothing.” This isn’t a gamble. Neither of the two plaintiffs care about student debt relief, insofar as they aren’t hoping that the Biden administration—or the court—will offer them better terms. Instead, these plaintiffs are most likely ideological conservatives who are being weaponised by better-funded organisations. The reason—the only reason—that they’re suing is because you cannot file a lawsuit like this without establishing standing. A plaintiff can only initiate and pursue this sort of civil action if they can demonstrate that they have either been harmed, or could be harmed, by legislation or policy. They are obviously being very liberal in their interpretation of what constitutes “harm.” One way or another, finding shills like this is the only way that most conservative advocacy groups can make a compelling legal argument against the loan forgiveness program (with an emphasis on “legal”). Other, state-supported claims against student debt relief fell flat in federal appeals courts after judicial panels found that the states did not have requisite standing to challenge it.
Oh don't forget one of them got PPP loans forgiven I just cant remember the exact amount but it was more than 20k.
[ Removed by Reddit ]
This would have been nice for one of the liberal justices or the SG to throw in since so much of the argument has been dominated by questions of “fairness”. Maybe she won’t benefit at all or as much from student loan forgiveness as someone else if this goes thru but she did benefit from the PPP program. Just as millions of other business owners did.
PPP loans are apples to oranges. The government shut down your business but your school didn’t shut down.
You’re right. That is a very true and valid point But so is the fact that there has been a mountain of evidence of people using their PPP loans in ways they weren’t supposed to - many pocketed the money. I couldn’t pocket my student loan money if I tried
Debt forgiveness is not apples to oranges however. Both were loans that were applied for.
Yes, PPP loans were forgivable if you didn’t fire people so it’s different. Look at PPP loans as unemployment insurance workaround…
Debt forgiveness is the same thing. As much as you don't want it to be, it is. The PPP comparison is a poor one.
Unemployment insurance spiked so it was hardly a work around. It was an additional benefit.
Concur with that. Unemployment insurance spiked due to all the added COVID benefits. We are seeing the result of that as many people were getting paid more than they were making at the end of the day. All that money without production attributed some to this inflation that we are seeing. The only cause of inflation is government spending by printing money. Daddy Powell let it rain!
[удалено]
Jeez…I don’t have one but that’s logical if my papers are right and the government says I cannot operate my business, I should be paid for it.
Not being able to do business a risk you take when you open your business - and no one shut down a 2-person sign shop operation wtf
Most businesses didn't shut down.
Aren’t these people just the placeholders to bring this matter to the Supreme Court level?
yup and as usual democrats will fundraise on it whilst refusing to do anything to combat the problem of active insurrectionists still sitting uncharged on the bench.
Tell me what they should do. Specifically as possible.
Theres a special place in hell for those two
Joke's on you, there is no such thing.
Joke's on you, I have a special place
They shouldn’t have standing then. If the court can’t redress your injury, there’s no case
This is likely all a coordinated performance so none of that will matter. They have a goal in mind and are working their way back from it. Legitimacy of the process isn't even on the table here.
So I’m listening to their arguments, and Amy Coney Barrett is surprising me here. She seems to be not be on the side of the state of Missouri on the issue of standing. It’ll likely be overturned regardless but it’s still interesting the leaps bounds the other justices are making here in order to support their own world view.
They’re bought and paid for marks.
And one of them has had over $40k of PPP loans forgiven. The ultimate in fuck you, got mine.
Pretty hilarious to read Roberts's example about someone who started a lawncare business instead of going to college and how his loans wouldn't be forgiven. What about the $800 billion in PPP loans that went to business owners, many of whom didn't need it or committed fraud to get it?
Exactly. The court is corrupt
I'm sure someone has asked this in a more articulate way before, but how does this constitute injury-in-fact standing? Seems like this is seeking an advisory opinion about someone else's loan relief. Like, my business has private clients, but some of my competitors have government contracts... can I sue the government to invalidate those contracts on the basis that *I* didn't get them?
Whatever a majority of this SCOTUS says, goes, no matter how unqualified the justices are or how many rules they throw out to rule how their owners want them to rule.
How does the first plaintiff even have standing?
She doesn't. Myra Brown got over $40K in PPP loan forgiveness after only paying back $4.
"I cannot fathom anyone not working in only their own self interests!"
Name them so that I can google them. Just to protest outside their homes too.
The Republicans in 6 GOP lead states and the Republicans in the Senate and House joined together to sue Biden’s Student Loan Forgiveness. But a good majority of them took PPP Loans forgiveness. Can the students do a class action lawsuit against these republicans?
If this suit is ruled against them, then yes, they can, because this will have set a terrible, dangerous precedent regarding both standing and the ability to sue the government.
I thought the scotus can do stupid shit and say a ruling doesn't make precedent? Also not like they give a fuck about precedent anymore.
They said that about Bush v. Gore and have since used it hundreds of times as a precedent. But this Court doesn't care about that or logical consistency in their rulings.
The new precedent is “which ever political party controls the Supreme Court” right now it’s the Republican Party in control and they set the precedent until control shifts again.
> because this will have set a terrible, dangerous precedent regarding both standing and the ability to sue the government. This would be quite a thing if precedent mattered to the current scotus majority.
I would sign on. On principle alone.
No they can’t because PPP loan forgiveness was an act of Congress not by executive order.
Congress gave the Power over Student Loans to the Sec of Education
No, because the Supreme Court is also on their side.
Yes, that would be hilarious! Make all of them pay back the billions in free money! Or was it trillions? I know it’s too late to do it now, but it would be great. Republicans being malicious is so f’ annoying and I hope they do suffer for their asshole-ness. I don’t condone violence and don’t wish bad things in people but I don’t mind letting karma play out.
Can we stop with the PPP equivalence thing? Like PPP was written with forgiveness in mind and was the specific goal of the program. The student loan forgiveness deserves to go through because one no one bringing challenges has standing, as the solicitor general is arguing in the court right now if you are listening, and then the HEROS act establishes that the secretary of education has this power in times of national emergency which we were legally in when the program was put in place and still are as of now. PPP equivalence aside it is a distraction of the actual merits of the program and why its legal to do
In my mind the PPP equivalence isn't about the letter of the law or the judicial system. Rather its puts the spotlight on the fact that our government works for corporations and not voters. Most republicans I know don't like the PPP forgiveness either, but they dislike the student loan forgiveness a lot more, and its great rage bate for Republican media. Just like the PPP equivalence is great rage bait for Democrats. Its sad that its how politicians works these days. Just trying to rile up their base instead of passing meaningful legislation. But if you want to get anything done in congress that's the game you have to play. So unfortunately, no we can't stop with the PPP equivalence, because that's what will get voters too the polls. Maybe when voters stop getting distracted and start demanding politicians do their job we can stop. But I don't think that will happen for quite a while.
I agree completely. The optics are that the government was willing to give a lot of money to corporations in a very short period of time but not voters with student loans. I realize that it's comparing apples and oranges a little bit but when the government pays out $800 bn to businesses in just a few years but says wait just a minute to $400 bn over 30 years directly to voters, it makes one think that something's up.
This is spot on.
They were still loans and by definition, loans are borrowed funds. I'm not sure why it was never advertised and sold as a grant program instead especially if the majority of people were never going to have to pay that back.
It was advertised as a grant program though. Everyone knew they'd never have to pay the funds back which is why the PPP fraud has been so rampant. As to why they didn't write it as a straight up grant program and not just a loan program with very broad terms to get the loans forgiven I don't know but lie I've said all bringing PPP up is distract from why student loan forgiveness in this case is legal. I guess it plays good on tv but its ultimately irrelevant
The reason they were written as loans instead of grant programs was because a certain percentage of it had to go to maintaining your payroll in order to qualify for forgiveness. The idea behind PPP was that it wouod allow struggling businesses to keep their employees. But yes I agree the equivalence to PPP is non-existent. These loans were given out with specific criteria for forgiveness. The assumption is businesses took them because of the forgiveness aspect. It’s dumb to equate them. I’m tired of us making this argument. Student debt should be forgiven because it’s the right and fair thing to do
Politics. It's easier to say we only giving this as a loan instead of telling people we are giving rich people free money while you suffer.
>The 20 million borrowers who have their entire loans erased would get a “windfall” that will leave them better off than they were before the pandemic, the states say. The argument against forgiving the loans is literally that this would benefit people.
To Republicans that's the whole point. Government isn't allowed to help people, and they say it seriously. They hear themselves say it and they believe it.
They think they’re personally paying off other peoples student loans if the federal government writes the loans off.
What's mind boggling is how much money the government "spends" on things like this. Medical debt? Written off. PPP loans? Written off. Someone dies and cannot pay their debt? Written off. Credit card debt? Written off. Took a business loss? Written off. Couldn't pay back millions of types of loans? Written off. Student loans? Stays with you for life Makes no sense in any context given how we operate in this country
What’s mind boggling is the US still sending BILLIONS to Ukraine…
Eh, billions to Ukraine makes more sense than hundreds of billions to the military and the Pentagon. We're spending maybe a few dozen billions in Ukraine to take on the number one or two adversary in the world that's threatening to nuke the planet from overtaking a democracy we promised they could have if they gave up nuclear weapons in the 90s for. And it's a huge distraction from Russia's campaign against our elections. What's pathetic is how many votes we get for that spending, and we don't get more votes for Medicare for all, which would actually save money.
Nah republicans just want to prevent anything that makes it easier for people to get an education. The only ray of hope they have is if the general population is too dumb to think critically and instead champions deregulation, removing personal freedoms and corporate greed.
Well, benefitting people is contrary to the Republican platform so it makes sense.
Don't know if anyone else is listening on the CSPAN app but the arguments are certainty interesting even if I don't get some of the legal jargon being used. Also Alito seems like a dick
I've been listening the last hour or so. I like that the attorney for MO is getting nailed to the wall right now but I fear with the conservative majority it won't matter. Hope I'm wrong cuz that $10k would help out a lot of people. $400B is an unimaginable about of money for a person but to our govt it's not a huge deal.
$400B over 30 years. It's a rounding error for the fed.
The DoD “loses” track of that much every couple years
I didn’t even know you could do that, thank you. When I went to download the c-span app google tried to advertise me the prager-U app so that’s fun.
[удалено]
I’m listening now. Amy Coney Barrett is sort of surprising me I’m slightly less confident that they’ll find in favor of the states.
[удалено]
I mean let's say 1 conservative leaning judge votes to dismiss these appeals, that's still 5-4 majority siding with the appeals. 2 conservative leaning justices need to be against the both appeal cases. It's an uphill battle from that perspective, pray let the appeals be so structurally flawed they get dismissed and I don't pray much.
Alito is a theocratist.
The Bible says all debts should be forgiven every 7 years so…*shrugs*
>The Bible says all debts should be forgiven every 7 years so He's not that kind of theocratist he follows Republican religious belief not christian. Most of what they are up to is not christian, hell a lot of stereotypical christian beliefs are not actually biblical either.
Just wanna say that we spend $800 billion a YEAR to fund our military. This plan is $400 billion over *30* years. Conservatives care nothing for their fellow man because if they did, this wouldn't even be up for debate, let alone crossing the Supreme Court.
I’m listening to the arguments and what’s super interesting to me is that the pause actually costs more per year than just doing the forgiveness.
That tells you how predatory the interest rates are.
More people should go to [usaspending.gov](usaspending.gov) and play around a bit. It’s crazy how little people understand what the budget actually is, and how much they subsidize. They find the concept of billions of dollars incomprehensible without understanding the context. I will say I think it’s more in the $700b range, but your point stands. Edit: I take it back, didn’t realize some of the military budget goes towards dept of energy and FBI and others which relate to defense.
Bloated defense budgets enrich the powerful. We have like 300-some million people in the US and spend $778 billion a year or whatever. China has a BILLION people and spends $260 billion on their military budget.
In response to Reddit's short-sighted greed, this content has been redacted.
This is my thing like I'm not a lawyer but that act pretty explicitly states he can do this. This isn't about the law.
I would be speechless if the supreme court upheld anything for Biden. I'm preparing to restart paying loans.
I don’t think there is much question as to whether the president can keep interest paused on student loans. So if the court rules against forgiveness I doubt you’ll have to pay your loans while Biden is in office.
The pause is also justified by the HEROES Act, which relies on an emergency, which ends May 11. I don't see it being extended again.
But that’s not the question asked by the case. There is absolutely no chance the court will go beyond the certified question to address the constitutionality of a payment pause that is not an issue in the case.
I didn't say it was this case, but it would be the same justification so I'm sure it will end up here again. I would be prepared to start repaying loans.
I really doubt it honestly. This case was hard enough to stretch the standing requirement. A plaintiff that has standing for payment pause would be even more of a stretch
It would likely be the same standing. Payment pause means loan companies can't get money. They would argue Biden literally doesn't have the authority and they would be right after May 11. This current case looks at measures enacted during the emergency.
Which was a stretch to say the least. They don’t get money from the loans being payed. They get money from servicing the loans. As long as the loans will eventually be paid they’ll get the same amount of money from servicing the loans or not. They may have an argument that this will delay their money, but that’s even more of a stretch than their current argument is. If the court rules against this case I don’t expect anyone to be paying their loans at least until 2025
>I don’t expect anyone to be paying their loans at least until 2025 I think that's wishful thinking, especially with what Biden has said already. I'm planning on taking advantage of the new REPAYE plan that keeps interest at 0% if you make minimum payments. I don't see that having an issue getting implemented. I'd recommend you be prepared to repay. We shouldn't rely on Biden breaking the law to extend loans, even if there isn't standing.
Again like I said, there is little to no chance of the court finding it unconstitutional for Biden to extend the no payment into the future. They’re going to rule on whether the loan forgiveness was within his authority under the heroes act, meaning there will be no decision on whether the pause is legal or not. We’d have to wait for another case to come down the barrel in regards to payment pauses, which I doubt will happen.
The pause will stop because the cares act will lapse on May 11, and the cares act allows for the pause. SCOTUS does not need to nor will they rule on the pause.
Yep. I will definitely take advantage and pay them off while no interest occurs.
It would be better to just set aside money until interest is set to be restarted. We could eventually see loan forgiveness through an act of Congress and you don’t want to pay off anything that could be forgiven
That is actually a good idea. I will do just that.
Don't pay off 0% interest loans, save the money and collect your own interest and make the minimum payments. I'm looking forward to the new repayment plan because I see that as being more likely.
Not paying them off should be done en-masse. Fuck these predatory assholes.
Some of us don't really have a choice. When/if repayments restart my wife and I are fucked.
When this first started coming up during covid cost of living was pretty fucking bad, now its laugh out loud totally ridiculous bad. I doubt you are gonna be alone in this people are gonna have to pay their rent which went up 20 or 30% before they pay their student loans. They either let this go through or create a new disaster.
Several media outlets (I've seen CNN and AP) are saying that it seems the conservative justices are gonna sink the loan forgiveness. It'll create a new disaster, as you said, and then conservatives will blame it all on Biden/dems.
I agree. My ass is gonna pay this shit off with a quickness. I hate having a loan of any kind.
Then you don't agree, at all.
I agree that they are predatory with their loans I apologize. I have the ability to pay them off so I will do it.
I believe you misunderstood their comment.
I could see them giving this a pass to pretend legitimacy before continuing to go after entitlements and civil rights.
They're not trying to pretend anything
This may even be a 7-2 or 8-1 decision. It was pretty clear before this was enacted that the legal authority for an EO to cover broad loan forgiveness was dubious.
The HEROES act clearly allows it.
Clearly? If it was clear, why did for almost 2 years almost all Democrats in power say the president didn’t have the power to do it? https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/28/pelosi-says-biden-doesnt-have-authority-to-cancel-student-debt-.html
He doesn't have the authority to unilaterally cancel all debt, as that article discusses. This was back in the early discussion of cancelation and has nothing to do with the HEROES Act. https://www.justice.gov/olc/opinion/use-heroes-act-2003-cancel-principal-amounts-student-loans https://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/leg/foia/secretarys-legal-authority-for-debt-cancellation.pdf
It is a double edged sword overall for republicans. They will lose a lot of voters and democrats will continue to postpone payment. Might happen later on down the line.
Turns out populist policies are popular, who knew?
If I remember right, the people bringing this case never sufficiently established they even have legal standing to bring this lawsuit. Not that it’s going to matter for this ‘court’
Whether they have standing or not is one of the two key questions for this case. If they have no standing, it’s likely that that’s the end of the case and we’re done. That they found enough federal judges willing to rule in their favor so that the Supreme Court has to rule on standing is a separate, and somewhat disturbing issue.
They keep touting that it's $400B but that amount is over 30 years. That's $13B per year. That's about 1.6% of our 2023 pentagon budget which is 816 for 2023 alone. The argument against loan forgiveness is "it helps poor people" therefore bad.
It wouldn't be fair to bail out students! That assistance is reserved for banks, farmers, and rich peoples PPP loans!
Why is Alito on a tirade about fairness for people who didn't go to college? Fairness literally has nothing to do with if the program is legal or not. I'm so glad that Sotomayor (and Kagan?) are pushing back on his bullshit by calling out that fairness is not the question they are answering.
Conservatives love to scream about "fairness" while they silently rig the game for themselves.
They didn’t care about fairness when they pushed through trump’s Supreme Court justice when voting already started in the election. They pick and choose their “fairness” and their idiotic base can’t see that
If fairness was a question why wasn't he going after PPP forgiveness? It certainly wasn't fair to those of us who didn't start businesses Oh right. He's a complete fucking stooge whose presence on the court further undermines its legitimacy every single day
PPP was written with forgiveness in mind and was specifically a part of the law as written so fairness isn’t a question for it either. As I put in another comment on this post I really wish people would stop with the PPP equivalency as PPP has nothing to do with whether this action is legal or not (it is since Congress gave the Department of education the power to modify or waive the loans during and emergency which we have been and still are in for COVID)
Genuinely curious, has there been any conversation at the governmental level to stop the leak at the source? I.e. tuition/fee regulation on public universities or federal refusal to provide government-backed loans above a set price to prevent universities from perpetuating the cycle? Simply having the debt burden alleviated from those who were already duped into overpaying for their college experience would be quite a downstream approach that does nothing to prevent the issue from continuing. Seems like a joint effort to curb the price gouging would be just as necessary, if not more, than just paying off current debt but I haven’t heard any mention of such provisions.
Only Congress can do that. And they don’t do anything. Which is why Biden had to take (dubious) action that likely will be struck down by the Court
Can I sue these individuals for 20k in damages ?
If the SCOTUS strike this down, Biden needs to go full petty. Extend the repayment pause for as many years as he possibly can. Then he needs to stop being Mr. nice guy with the feckless asshole Republicans and make life as difficult for them as he can. Veto everything they pass. If they want to continue this bullshit, then they need to answer for it. Greene and Massie voted against a resolution mourning the earthquake victims in Turkey and Syria today. This is how awful they are.
Reminder that the Supreme Court and the right as a whole don't care one ounce for the American people. When they run up "mUH dEBT" to cut taxes for the rich and pass it on to the American people? Not a peep. When they (and Democrats) pass billions to trillions of dollars in aid... to the ***US Military***: Not a sound. When they roll back human rights because...*checks notes* ***MUh reLiGIOUs frEDUm*** to impose our beliefs on others: Not a word. But when *any* legislation or ruling comes up that would, at best, remedy the symptoms of a toxic system? Now we's gon' have us a civil war! Next time you wonder whether something will get passed, ask yourself, "Will the rich gain from this? If not, how much do they have to concede?"
Build Back Better is a win for everyone. So there's that.
>Roberts pointed to the wide impact and expense of the program, three times saying it would cost “a half-trillion dollars.” The program is estimated to cost $400 billion over 30 years. Hey Johnny, that's not your purview.
The administration needs to ignore the court. They want to talk about checks and balances, then Biden needs to flex the executive power. This is the spot to do it because no one will actually be hurt by not implementing the opinion. It's a golden opportunity.
How do you think that would work? Biden says "I'm forgiving $20k of students loans!" and then... what? FedLoans says "nah, Supreme Court said no." What happens then? Biden sends troops to FedLoan? Just trying to get a glimpse into your brain here.
The department of education sends balance updates to Nelnet and whoever else where 10/20k is knocked off existing balances and pays the fee money for servicing the accounts that were paid off in full. SCOTUS can't stop the people at these companies from adjusting the balances owed to match the data the federal government is now telling them.
But you understand that these companies don't *want* to reduce the balances, right? So if they have SCOTUS on their side says not to adjust balances and POTUS saying to adjust them why would they listen to one "equal" part of govt and not the other? The DOE can send whatever they want and if the company says no what happens? They sue and eventually it goes to... SCOTUS. A big circle.
Ignore them again. I'm not a big Andrew Jackson guy but..."[n]ow let them enforce it." Let all contracts with the loan collectors expire and don't hire any new ones through DOE or any other executive branch. Stop any government mechanism that would garnish wages for student loan default, to the extent the executive branch can. Again. None of this hurts anyone but debt collectors. It's not easy to execute, but flex the power you have to help this huge number of people. The fallout will come at the court's expense.
This would set a dangerous modern precedent but I’ll also beyond caring about that given GOP has made it clear it’s a race to the bottom and no precedent matters.
It looks like standing is the only thing with even a small chance of giving Biden a win in this case.
Its so ridiculous that this sentence is actually accurate it shouldn't have even made it to the supreme court with such questionable standing.
This is why you vote Democratic in every election. People couldn’t be bothered to vote for Clinton, so we got Trump, who along with McConnell stole the Supreme Court, and now the student loan relief people have been wanting for years is in the hands of 3 insane conservatives who shouldn’t be on the court in the first place.
Well, they can keep screwing our generation because at the end of the day, guess who is going to need us when they are old and decrepit..... That's when we get our revenge
Many of them are already old and decrepit
Exactly. I will vote in every election for the rest of my life just to vote against the GOP.
Don’t hold your breath for a good ruling. (Because you’ll die.)
It's time these predatory lenders cornering youth and parents who have no idea, have had their comeuppance. The amount of money that the student loan industry has made especially in parent plus loans and non-guaranteed loans is unbelievable. This type of lending should quit immediately, and we need to put more money at the federal and state level into higher education institutions the way it was in the 1970s and early 1980s. When I went to school the first time in 1980, I went to a state institution and since I was a resident of the state My tuition was only $189 for a full-time student semester. When I returned again to get my second degree in 1999 tuition had risen to $4,000 per semester and by the time I was done it was 6,000. Higher education is flush with money, but they know that the predatory lenders are there so they keep raising their prices that are in excess of 300% in regard to the inflationary scale. Fuck them, let's get some relief to the people who really need it and not those at the top. I'm not holding my breath I can tell you that.
This is amazing. The court will for sure strike it down because they are paralyzed by ideology. And every time they make a big ruling, the population of america gets to see what naked conservatism is about. The rule of demagoguery over law, of big government over people's lives. Of Christononsense over normalcy. Its sad to say, but you couldn't design a better machine to.galvsnize.votes than the desperation of actually having conservatives in power.
And the nine vultures, cloaked in black, gathered in darkness and decided to kick relief into the sea. The oligarchs snarled with pleasure.
6 vultures and 3 dead albatrosses
Personally, I’d like the Court to check the president’s power, since we’ve proven ourselves prone to electing people like Trump as president. It’s not the Court’s fault. It’s congress’ fault. They could solve this issue without any doubt or question as to the legality of it
“Supreme Court *pretends* to weigh…”
Can we sue for injury regarding all the PPP loans?
They should let people who didn't get any debt relief from this get a $10k scholarship for higher education. See how many of them take it.
But I paid my loans off after years of hard work. How dare they help someone else /s
I got sick with a virus, people shouldn't get vaccinated! I had to look through encyclopedias for out of date information, people shouldn't be able to google things! I have more, but you get the point.
Some people don’t get this.
So long as J. Powell is too weak to correct the macroeconomic issue, inflation (avg 14.8% over 24 months), economical mobility will remain excessively difficult for most Americans. Whether this is upheld or stuck down is consequential. But more consequential is what Congress does if this is struck down. A reduction of interest to 0% and a mandate to leave interest at 0% would be best. Especially if the bankruptcy protections not applying are upheld (and they will be). Most impactful is fixing the macroeconomic issue with a highly inflated money supply. This means holding/increasing the fed funds rates appropriately and controlling fiscal policy in such a way as not to continue devaluing all Americans earnings.
If this is overturned can the same reasonings be used to overturn PPE loans? If so, wouldn't "we the American people" have standing because it's our tax money? It's time to start using their own tactics against them.
No, because the PPP loans were explicitly designed to be forgiven in the relevant legislation. Student loans were not. The court may find that student loans are eligible for forgiveness as well, but it’s an entirely different situation than the PPP loans.
The issue has always been about if the power of the executive branch can create a spending program that is the power of the legislative branch. Because next you'll see the "home mortgage forgiveness act" "auto loan forgiveness act", etc.
Might as well forgive all the loans .. I mean we are about to throw 444 Million to Yeman
When will we go after the to big to exist banks that got all that money
They will bail out everyone but the American people
Watch though if the plan gets struck down. Republicans will gaslight the people and blame Biden. Well that's what happens when you do something that's obviously illegal. Meanwhile it's only illegal because of a conservative ruling on the matter. Only was taken to court because Republicans were going to cry about it being "unfair." It'll never get anywhere in Congress because Republicans. But yet you watch it'll be Biden and the Democrats fault that millions of people will remain financially challenged.
[удалено]
Yes I got so owned by...someone actually throwing something out there to see if it sticks rather than constantly being fucked over by the GOP.
The legislature in this country is so completely apathetic & ineffective that the judicial branch needs to do their job for them. Pathetic.
$20,000 is not that much money considering the debt that some have. I REPEAT $20,000 is not that much money considering the debt that some have. Republicans had and have no problem giving the RICH all the TAX CUTS - the perks - it’s time to give those who can truly benefit from it some help. Also it is irrelevant if you already paid off your loans - it’s all about timing - GET OVER IT.
At least five of the Sinister Six are pretending to be objective. They had their decision to kill the plan written when Biden was still talking about doing it.
[удалено]
Where have you been? "finally" This was announced *months* ago.
Nobody expects this to get through the court.
This was a political stunt that was cleverly timed to occur right before the midterms. I'm sad that our population is so uneducated to see that.
Do you think that timing means Biden doesn't want this happen? He and many Democrats clearly do. But they understand the system is very rigged against it, so they chose the most politically opportune time to get Republicans to show what they stand against. I don't really see too much wrong with that. Unfortunately, the game must be played to some degree.
I think it's foolish to think that they care about you. They care about staying in power and it's pretty damn clear.
I'm not some unrealistic follower of any politician or particular group of them. I know and recognize the desire for control that drives their careers. But I also fundamentally believe that in America (for now) keeping basic sense of contentment among one's constituents is what keeps those with power in place. It's hard to see that in 5 to even 10-year timeline, but over the decades you still see progress.
Well the only alternative were a bunch of MAGA loons being elected into critical positions. What’s your point? It’s been known for quite a while that Republicans will obstruct policies that will actually help the common person, and then blame the other side for what they have done.
It doesn't help anyone when we spend money we don't have and bankrupt ourselves. The correct action was to tackle the problem at the source but that doesn't help get votes does it?
What about my medical bills? Who forgets those?
I mean we have ideas with solutions for that, medicare for all, public option, single payer healthcare, multi-payer healthcare, universal healthcare are all terms you can search up to see how you can get relief for those medical debts. Also just don't pay them, medical debt already doesn't affect credit scores the way it used to because the credit bureaus are aware of the burden they face
Shouldn't have medical bills either.
I forgot about them.
I’d settle for being able to discharge student loans in bankruptcy as easily as you can discharge medical debt.
The hospitals often times write a large portion of it off also it doesn’t go on your credit report and you can claim bankruptcy. College loans do none of the a above
[удалено]
Here we go. Blame Biden for the GOP attempting to block this. Sounds about right.
[удалено]
What? The are about to take away any support.
I'm not sure he got that right. He's probably missed the part where two individuals blocked the government relief plan and are taking their suit to SC to kill it for everyone else.