John Roberts Likens Biden's Executive Action on Student Loans to Trump's Executive Action on Immigration
That’s bad news for Biden.

Three years ago, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote a majority opinion blocking the Trump administration from unilaterally rescinding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program. The manner in which the Trump administration took that particular executive action, Roberts held in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, "was arbitrary and capricious" and exceeded the executive branch's lawful authority.
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments yesterday in another far-reaching case about executive power. And unfortunately for the current presidential administration, the chief justice apparently sees a close resemblance between yesterday's case and his 2020 ruling against former President Donald Trump.
Yesterday's case was Biden v. Nebraska. At issue is President Joe Biden's 2022 use of executive authority to cancel up to $10,000 in student loan debt for every borrower who earns less than $125,000 a year while canceling up to $20,000 for every borrower who took out a Pell Grant and earns less than $125,000 a year.
According to "your view," the chief justice told Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, "the president can act unilaterally" and "there was no role for Congress to play in this either." Roberts seemed to have a problem with that view. "We take very seriously the idea of separation of powers and that power should be divided to prevent its abuse, and there are many procedural niceties that have to be followed for the same purpose," he said.
Those comments from Roberts were bad enough from the Biden administration's point of view. But things soon got worse. "This case reminds me of the one we had a few years ago under a different administration, where the administration tried acting on its own to cancel the Dreamers program, and we blocked that effort," Roberts said. He hardly needed to add that he himself wrote the opinion against Trump's executive action.
A few minutes later, the chief justice returned to the big questions about executive power raised by yesterday's case. "If you're talking about this in the abstract," he told the solicitor general, "I think most casual observers would say, if you're going to give up that much amount of money, if you're going to affect the obligations of that many Americans on a subject that's of great controversy, they would think that's something for Congress to act on." And if Congress hasn't "acted on it," Roberts continued, "then maybe that's a good lesson to say for the President—or the administrative bureaucracy that maybe that's not something they should undertake on their own."
If Roberts really does view Biden v. Nebraska in this light, and if at least four other justices see things the same way, Biden's student loan cancellation plan is doomed.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Perhaps the Biden administration could get around this by offering debt relief to undocumented workers.
This would satisfy both the Roberts court AND the flagship libertarian magazine.
Debt relief for food trucks & hookers.
This is bad news for "Executive Actions" at large! I, for one, WELCOME the at-least-butt-at-last partial neutering of our fat-headed and fat-assed OverLards! BOTH SIDES, ALL of ye power pigs!
John Roberts is a well educated idiot.
Youre really comparing Biden spending 400B plus in disregard to a law to the Supreme Court saying a president can’t rescind a prior EO due to animus? Lol.
In the Trump case Obama created a program without congressional approval and courts blocked it from being rescinded by reading the mind of another president saying he has bad intentions.
The proper comparison here is Biden creating a spending program outside of legislation LIKE Obama did for DACA.
Democrats were in the wrong in both cases. Just the idiocy around illegal immigration caused Roberts to invent mind reading abilities to save one.
Yeah that this is Robert's take shows he is a retard. The two are complete opposites.
I think the argument is more that "if Trump's action was wrong (and we said so), there's no possible way that this can be right."
Home earnings allow all people to paint on-line and acquire weekly bills to financial institutions. Earn over $500 each day and get payouts each week instantly to account for financial institutions. (bwj-03) My remaining month of earnings was $30,390 and all I do is paint for as much as four hours an afternoon on my computer. Easy paintings and constant earnings are exquisite with this job.
More information→→→→→ https://WWW.DAILYPRO7.COM
He’s a retard because he didn’t even mention the law that the administration is using to justify the action - the HEROES Act. That act goes explicitly to the ability of the administration to provide relief on student loans. Roberts should be asking whether Congress gave permission for this kind of relief. As much as I despise this relief it’s not cut-and-dried IMO based on that law. Regardless, why isn’t Roberts focusing on that law? It’s as bad as Sotomayer whining about how this is good for students. Not relevant!
Neither is the amount of money or the number of Americans affected. ""I think most casual observers would say, if you're going to give up that much amount of money, if you're going to affect the obligations of that many Americans on a subject that's of great controversy, they would think that's something for Congress to act on.""
More apt I think our Trump's tariffs. Biden can point Heroes Act and Trump to the Trade Act of 1974. Neither is constitutional for the president to act on their own authority to control the purse strings of the nation.
Difficulty with your argument is Trumps use of tariffs were not novel but oar for the course. Every president has utilized that act toboush trade policy. Trump didn’t invent a theory like DACA or student loan relief.
The tariff actions were a power Congress explicitly bestowed on the executive through legislation. There is an argument to be made that Congress should not have done that, but that is a different debate from the expansive powers Biden is trying to read into limited legislation applicable to an emergency.
And again, the DACA ruling is strange as it prevented Trump from rescinding the Obama EO that was implemented illegally by the very standards SCOTUS used to overule Trump's countermanding EO.
Agreed. Why I laughed at the comparison in the article. Just a weird stretch.
The real question anymore is when are democrats NOT in the wrong?
It is rare; but it happens accidentally once in a few hundred years. 🙂
Problem is Democrats do Gangster Building. Always classifying and pitting one 'group' against another. It's [WE]De-mob-ocracy ideology without a Supreme Law of principles.
Yeah, was trying to reconcile this as well. DACA is still likely to be found illegal as it was never authorized by statute rather by EO. The Trump admin simply rescinded the EO and, apparently, did some procedural things wrong, at least according to Roberts.
How is it even close to being similar to the loan forgiveness case? Roberts perhaps should have compared it to the *introduction* of DACA?
Edit: I forgot that DACA was ruled illegal in 2021 and no longer accepts new applicants. Previous recipients are still granted protections while the case goes through appeals.
Roberts' decision in the DACA case was made because at the time, he could swing the court in favor of the establishment's preferred outcome, which has been his SOP since the beginning.
He knows he can't do that in this case, so he's insinuating that he's going to go along with the conservative justices, while giving the left a talking point to cry about.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35,500 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,500 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link———————————————>>> http://Www.JobsRevenue.Com
Yes, they truly are that stupid.
Agreed, John Roberts is a well educated idiot.
'And if Congress hasn't "acted on it," Roberts continued, "then maybe that's a good lesson to say for the President—or the administrative bureaucracy that maybe that's not something they should undertake on their own."'
But if Congress does not act then that is legal justification for at least 3 executive orders and one new agency.
(Am I doing the Living Constitution thing correctly?)
DACA was created despite multiple failures in Congress. Robert’s upheld DACA for congress not rescinding the program it never created. Roberts is a terrible justice.
I do not get how an EO can become a "superprecedent", but for Roberts, DACA is that.
Biden said on day one he was going to rescind every trump EO because it was him who signed it. Done out of Animus. If Roberts was consistent he would overturn virtually all of Bidens EOs.
Maybe we could fix MUCH of this by FORCING people to buy magazines? Might that work?
Hey Damiksec, damiskec, and damikesc, and ALL of your other socks…
How is your totalitarian scheme to FORCE people to buy Reason magazines coming along?
Free speech (freedom from “Cancel Culture”) comes from Facebook, Twitter, Tik-Tok, and Google, right? THAT is why we need to pass laws to severely constrict these DANGEROUS companies (which, ugh!, the BASTARDS, put profits above people!)!!! We must pass new laws to retract “Section 230” and FORCE the evil corporations to provide us all (EXCEPT for my political enemies, of course!) with a “UBIFS”, a Universal Basic Income of Free Speech!
So leftist “false flag” commenters will inundate Reason-dot-com with shitloads of PROTECTED racist comments, and then pissed-off readers and advertisers and buyers (of Reason magazine) will all BOYCOTT Reason! And right-wing idiots like Damikesc will then FORCE people to support Reason, so as to nullify the attempts at boycotts! THAT is your ultimate authoritarian “fix” here!!!
“Now, to “protect” Reason from this meddling here, are we going to REQUIRE readers and advertisers to support Reason, to protect Reason from boycotts?”
Yup. Basically. Sounds rough. (Quote damikesc)
(Etc.)
See https://reason.com/2020/06/24/the-new-censors/
(And Asshole Extraordinaire will NEVER take back its' totalitarian bullshit!!!! 'Cause Asshole Extraordinaire is already PERFECT in every way!!!)
This (above damikesc quote) is a gem of the damnedest dumbness of damikesc! Like MANY “perfect in their own minds” asshole authoritarians around here, he will NEVER take back ANY of the stupidest and most evil things that he has written! I have more of those on file… I deploy them to warn other readers to NOT bother to try and reason with the most utterly unreasonable of the nit-wit twits here!
Roberts is strongly motivated by concern over how much the beltway crowd likes him. Which makes him unfit to serve on SCOTUS. Just like all the democrat appointed justices are completely unfit.
Right, he talks about removing Congress from the process and separation of powers, but then likens it to DACA which effectively repealed an act of Congress unilaterally.
I support the effect of DACA, but if we are going to be a functional nation the correct processes need to be followed. Unfortunately a powerful is executive is what Ds want, and situations like this are win-win for them. If the EO stands they get a more powerful president, if its struck down they erode public opinion of SCOTUS and Republicans generally.
The man saved Obamacare for crying out load!
John Roberts is a well educated idiot.
Following the DACA example I suppose Biden can draft an EO stating that no enforcement action be taken against borrowers who don't make their payments. No withholding tax refunds, no reporting missed or late payments to credit bureaus, no reporting of defaults. Heck no reporting of new loans either. Effectively forgives all present and future loan obligations by simply eliminating the consequences of not paying them.
Biden is already doing that. The other quietly advertised portion of the student loan issue has been Biden granting waivers to payments for 3 years. These are not extended to the life of the loan but basically reduce the loan. For some people who get debt wiped in 10 years based on various social/government programs this is a completely quiet reduction of student loan debt already.
No shit.
John Roberts thinks Biden is Dictator King and can rule by royal decree.
I was expecting Roberts to call it a tax and say it's legit.
agreed.
Ah now, John Roberts could have said debt forgiveness is a human and constitutional right given by God, but then that would have affected more than over educated liberals that refuse to pay their student loans and are willing to sell their vote.
What is it with the dollar cap Congress puts in place for the “poor”? Everything is capped out at $125,00. That is ridiculous. I had a pretty good job and earned a little over half of that at best.
See pay rates for federal jobs. Usually aligns with those caps to pay off their most favored voters.
Technically you can make up to 250,000 and still qualify, if you're married and your spouse doesn't have income.
The undocumented question might be whether 4 justices like the program enough that they can convince Gorsuch to help them toss the case for lack of standing.
I get paid more than $140 to $170 per hour for working online. I heard about this job 3 months ago and after joining this I have earned easily $10k from this without having online working skills . Simply give it a shot on the accompanying site…
Here is I started.…………>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
I think it's a pretty big difference that Trump 'arbitrarily and capriciously' decided to stop a program of violating the law, while Biden arbitrarily and capriciously has decided to start a program of violating the law.
That is to say, Trump's action was perfectly consistent with his duty as President to "take care that the law is faithfully executed", and the complaint was that he didn't check off some procedural boxes in the process of deciding to stop blowing off enforcing the law.
While Biden's action, in addition to being procedurally deficient, is contrary to his Presidential duty to uphold the law.
So, not really the same at all except in the matter of the box checking.
You would make a better Supreme court justice than John Roberts. At least you don't have your head up your ass.
CJ Roberts likens himself to Solomon trying to split a baby. Dude, that kind of judicial philosophy doesn't fucking work.
Except in splitting a baby in half no one wins so it ended the debate, so Solomon was wise. Roberts wants to pick the winners and losers not end the debate and bring the same kind of future problems to the court, so he is very much not wise.
John Roberts is such an ass. Trump repealed codified illegality. Biden is imposing illegality.