Official Student Debt Cancellation Watch Thread
- Thread starter Serious
- Start date
mastermind
Rest In Power Kobe
He’s been wrong for at least 30 years
That's the argument and most law makers agree with this position.
He can try and it's certainly going to end up at SCOTUS.
People acting like it's bulletproof are delusional.
King Kreole
natural blondie like goku
So those $11B that Biden already unilaterally forgave without explicit Congressional sign-off, what did those law makers do or say about that?
The interest payments that Biden has unilaterally forgiven with the pauses and extensions, did SCOTUS pull up on Biden for that?
Those people have very specific hardship or fall under PSLF.So those $11B that Biden already unilaterally forgave without explicit Congressional sign-off, what did those law makers do or say about that?
The interest payments that Biden has unilaterally forgiven with the pauses and extensions, did SCOTUS pull up on Biden for that?
The fact that you're attempting to suggest someone getting student debt relief because their school went under, lost accreditation, or they had physical hardships to blanket debt just because shows the inherrant bad faith in your argument.
This isn't a borrowers defense scenario for everyone.and if by chance they do argue that all student debt is predatory then they'd certainly have to prove it.
Elizabeth Warren and many lawmakers in the House and Senate even moderates cite The Federal Claims Collection Act of 1966 and the Secretary's authority given by Congress in the 1960s as to why this is not a new appropriation. "Power of the purse" means spending. No spending is required to forgive student debt because the money was already spent.
The question to also ask is who would sue? Who *has standing* to sue to oppose it? And if you say student loan servicers, why haven't they sued in 2020 and 2021? Surely they know the powers the Education Department has to pause, forgive, compromise and settle debts. The federal government is also paying out their contracts, so what is the show of harm?
That would depend on the method right.
Of course. And I am aware of her memo as well as the competing memo release by the DOE under the last administration.
The argument basically went that the president via the Secretary of Education has broad authority to forgive debt, but only on a case by case basis. The reason being that congress appropriated funds for student loans with the expectation that the DOE would faithfully attempt to recover though funds wherever its reasonable.
I'd assume anyone who is capable of paying their Debt whose debt has been settled would have standing.
That said, I don't think a potential legal challenge is any reason not to do so since the reality is we're in this position because congress hasn't chosen to act.
Blanket student debt relief as you're suggesting has never been taken up. The lack of challenges isn't a good barometer since most of the people seeking and receiving student debt relief at this point have all had it done for very specific circumstances. I don't think a jubilee is a circumstance, but I hope y'all get it.
I do wonder folks thoughts on what happens if it isn't successful? Will folks be like, well at least he tried?
King Kreole
natural blondie like goku
Your argument is the definition of bad faith because you're attempting to obfuscate the point at hand. What does it matter to the Executive Branch's authority to relieve student loan debt that the group they've already forgiven $11B of had their school go under or lose accreditation or had physical hardships? Either the Executive Branch has the authority to forgive and/or pause the student loans owned by the government or they don't.
It's a simple question, who forgave that $11B of student loan debt? Was it Congress with a new line item appropriation of $11B or was it the Executive Branch and DoE using their authority? Bringing up various sub-classifications of student loan debtors has no bearing on this discussion, especially in light of the Executive Branch already applying universality to relief when they paused payments and forgave the interest that would have accrued during that period for every debtor.
Last edited:
It's not my argument. It's literally the argument presented by the former DOE.
Pretending there aren't two schools of thought on the legality of something that has never been done before doesn't enhance the validity of your argument.
My position is and always has been that any action taken up via executive action will be met with lawsuits. Then I just presented the tldr of the argument many opponents of it argue.
I honestly don't care one way or the other since it doesn't affect me. But as I've said numerous times they should try it since there's no way it's passing congress.
