Supreme Court to Biden: You Can't Just Forgive $400 Billion in Student Loan Debt Without Asking Congress
Nancy Pelosi agrees.

The Supreme Court has struck down President Joe Biden's student loan forgiveness plan, ruling 6–3 that the plan, which had promised up to $20,000 in federal student loan forgiveness per borrower, was not authorized under existing law. It was widely expected that the Court would halt Biden's proposal.
Last August, Biden announced that the Department of Education would launch a sweeping student loan forgiveness plan, forgiving $10,000 in federal student loan debt for single borrowers making up to $125,000 per year and married couples making up to $250,000. Borrowers who received Pell Grants would be eligible for $20,000 in loan forgiveness.
Almost immediately, the plan was met with legal challenges. The Supreme Court agreed to hear two cases, one filed jointly by six Republican-led states that wished to block the measure, and another filed in Texas by two state residents who were not eligible for the maximum relief provided by the plan.
The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the plaintiffs in the Texas case had no standing. But it ruled in favor of the coalition of Republican states, deciding that Biden's attempt at legitimizing the proposal through the HEROES Act—and the billions in federal spending that it would entail—fell flat on the merits and was unconstitutional.
The HEROES Act is a 9/11-era law designed to allow the government to grant student loan relief to soldiers who withdrew from college to enter active duty. The law gives the Department of Education the authority to "waive or modify" any "requirement or regulation" of a federal student loan plan for individuals who "suffered direct economic hardship as a direct result of a war or other military operation or national emergency."
While the Department of Education argued that this granted it broad authority to cancel student loan debt, citing COVID-19 as the "national emergency" in question, the Supreme Court didn't buy it. "The Secretary's plan has 'modified' the cited provisions only in the same sense that 'the French Revolution "modified" the status of the French nobility,'" wrote Chief Justice John Roberts in the majority opinion. "It has abolished them and supplanted them with a new regime entirely."
Roberts continued: "The Secretary has not truly waived or modified the provisions in the Education Act authorizing specific and limited forgiveness of student loans. Those provisions remain safely intact in the U. S. Code, where they continue to operate in full force. What the Secretary has actually done is draft a new section of the Education Act from scratch by 'waiving' provisions root and branch and then filling the empty space with radically new text."
Roberts further asserted that only Congress could authorize such extensive student loan forgiveness. He even cited former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D–Calif.), who told reporters in 2021, "People think that the President of the United States has the power for debt forgiveness. He does not. He can postpone. He can delay. But he does not have that power. That has to be an act of Congress."
The ruling marks a decisive halt to a proposal that would have cost taxpayers an estimated $400 billion. While higher education—and particularly graduate school—is too expensive for many students, loan forgiveness does nothing to address the root cause of inflated college tuition. Instead, Biden's plan would have primarily benefited wealthier Americans, and it would have resulted in outstanding student loan debt returning to current levels by 2028.
Policies that restrict the supply of federal student loans—for example, lowering the cap on the amounts individuals can borrow, or refusing to provide federal loans for programs and colleges that leave students financially worse off—are the clearest way to improve the situation in the long term. Unfortunately, long-term solutions aren't nearly as attractive as the short-term appeal of giving a payout to a group of Americans that also happens to comprise a significant part of the Democratic base, with the announcement coming shortly before the 2022 midterms.
From the beginning, Biden's plan was doomed to fail. As Roberts wrote, "Our precedent— old and new—requires that Congress speak clearly before a Department Secretary can unilaterally alter large sections of the American economy." Biden surely knew—or should have known—this. But instead of attempting to enact his policy goals through Congress, he embarked on a 10-month boondoggle that has met its predictable end.
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
I am making $90 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning $16,000 a month by working on a laptop, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply.
Everybody must try this job now by just using this website. https://www.apprichs.com/
Why the fuck are you trying to prop up Nancy? She flipped her stance in 2022.
“President Biden’s bold action is a strong step in Democrats’ fight to expand access to higher education and empower every American to reach fulfillment,” Pelosi said in a statement Wednesday, adding the move will help “more working families” meet their everyday needs “as they continued to recover from the challenges of the pandemic.”
https://nypost.com/2022/08/24/pelosi-flip-flops-on-bidens-student-debt-forgiveness-plan/
Meanwhile you ignore all the politicians that have remained against it. Odd choice.
Because it’s an argument against interest.
The point is not to make Pepsi look good, it’s to say that even Nancy Pelosi admits that the President doesn’t have the power to unilaterally forgive student debt.
Did you miss the part where she changed her stance? Notice when? After she left. She was posturing for credit prior.
It doesn't really matter that she changed her stance. All that means is that, no matter what the Supreme Court ruled, she would be right!
That, and she never really provided a sound legal reason why she was wrong before, and right later.
Like the great stance-flipper, Obama. Made an impassioned speech about raising the debt ceiling then went 180 when he needed some cash. Told everyone he was not a king and could not just wave his hand and make illegal aliens legal, then gave us DACA and DAPA. Obama was in favor of same-sex marriage before he was against it, before he was for it again.
“Well, I think as– as you know– and I’ve said this before to you, Jose, but– I’m not a king,” Obama replied. “You know, my job as the head of the executive branch ultimately is to carry out the law. And– you know, when it comes to enforcement of our immigration laws– we’ve got some discretion. We can prioritize– what we do. But we can’t simply ignore the law.”
And then, he went and ignored the law.
Yes, but, and I’m putting this in italics because your reading comprehension is a little lacking, no one gives a shit about Nancy Pelosi’s reputation.
Not the SC justices who signed the ruling and not Emma Camp here at Reason. They are citing Pelosi because she is one of the most prominent Democratic lawmakers of the last decade, and she agreed that the President doesn’t have this power. They want strong support for their case, and she makes a useful prop.
Agreed. I don’t see this as propping up Nancy, unless Jesse thinks the justices were propping her up by using her words. I actually think it was a little twist of the knife.
As for why the other politicians were ignored, well, that’s because their quotes weren’t cited in the opinion.
There are dozens of politicians who have remained consistent on the issue. Nancy is not one of them.
Which is one of the points they are highlighting!
Face it - Nancy was pwnd by SCOTUS.
I'm sure Nancy will hammer out a deal with dementia Joe soon enough.
Regardless of Reason's motivations, which I agree are suspect, I think it's useful to point out that she made that statement back in 2021. It would have been even more useful to put the 2021 and 2022 statements side by side.
It shows that even Democrats don't really believe presidents should have that much power, and it shows that she'll say absolutely anything.
She often wanted to be the "hero" of these plans. In 2021 she was trying to get congress to be the decider likely for her own ego before retiring.
Then your beef is with SCOTUS. Their opinion used Nancy's quote. Emma simply quoted the opinion.
Nobody was trying to prop up Pelosi. Your knee-jerk reactions are missing context.
That was for Jesse above.
Why the fuck are you trying to prop up Nancy?
Pelosi/Amash 2024
No Polis? Fail.
Can't have a ticket without Governor McDreamy.
We all agree she is horrible. It's great user her words against her, even if she flopped later.
And the coddled class commits mass suicide, in a eco-friendly way.
If only.
Upper middle class white kid: President Biden, do your Kingly Duty and cancel the debt I voluntary undertook to earn my useless degree that your former boss encouraged.
Wait you missed the stories about "without the pause or forgiveness, how will I pay for my new house or new car or my onlyfans subscriptions"
I would me more than happy if I could get even $1 forgiven from my student loans! Even if I disagreed with how that forgiveness came about.
But the fact remains that, had I gotten any forgiveness, it wouldn't have mattered to me one whit: I would have had $45k instead of $65k of debt, I'd still have my little payment each month (well, once it's no longer delayed due to unemployment) that would hardly put a dent in what remained, and it wouldn't have done anything for me financially, except maybe to look forward to having no payments in 20 years, instead of the currently scheduled 30.
a lot of student loan money is not even spent at educational institutions. Money is borrowed to fund a luxury lifestyle at near-campus resort-like apartment complexes.
For example:
THE RETREAT
Lifestyle
STUDENT APARTMENTS NEAR UGA
Join a student housing community that offers premier Athens apartments near the University of Georgia. At The Retreat on Milledge, residents are greeted with lavish apartment interiors, complete with contemporary furnishings and state-of-the-art appliances to help create a comfortable living environment. Bulldogs can live life to its fullest during their time at The Retreat with access to a plethora of on-site amenities, including a large clubhouse, resort-style pool, and private study rooms, as well as a wide selection of nearby shopping locations, adventure destinations, and local eateries.
Or another example:
LIVE AT LUXE BELLE
Sleek, stylish, lively, convenient —Luxe Belle is your home away from home in Columbus, OH. Our apartments are conveniently located just steps from Ohio State University. Step outside of your home to enjoy the state of the art fitness center, arcade room, private study rooms, and garage parking. Enjoy a truly luxe living experience in this boutique-inspired community, perfectly designed as the OSU student choice for high-end living. Your fully furnished home will break the monotony of dorm life and allow you to indulge in all of the premium amenities you crave while offering access to the unrivaled adventures of student life. Say ‘Goodbye’ to your commute to class or the office, and ‘Hello’ to convenience and stylized living just outside your front door.
A lot of student loan money is taken out by wealthier families to support their spawn Jackson and Jessica's latte-sipping lifestyle to which they've become accustomed and for whom plebian dorms with common shower areas would be akin to prison.
—————–
At The Knox, we’ve designed a student apartment community with everything you need for a quality living experience! Our luxury, fully furnished three-, four-, and five-bedroom apartments in the Fort Sanders area of downtown Knoxville are just steps from the heart of the University of Tennessee, Knoxville campus. And when it comes to our list of off-the-chart amenities, we’ve got it all! Relax in style year-round at our outdoor entertainment space featuring hot tubs, hammocks, an open-air theater, and grilling stations, or drop by our clubhouse to watch the game or shoot some pool with friends. When it’s time to hit the books, you have access to individual study rooms and a resident coffee bar. The Knox is where you need to be!
At The Knox, we’ve designed a community with everything you need, just steps from the heart of campus. Relax in style year-round up at The Deck, our outdoor entertainment space featuring hot tubs, hammocks, an open-air theater, and grilling stations. Hit the books in an individual study room, or help yourself at Wired, our coffee bar. Drop by our clubhouse, The Hangout, to watch the game or shoot some pool with friends – at The Knox, we’ve got it all. Our fully furnished three-, four-, and five-bedroom apartments in the heart of the historic Fort Sanders area of downtown Knoxville feature individual leases and individual bathrooms with almost every bedroom, and covered parking is available.
----------
At Varsity Club, we want to help support their productivity by giving them access to outdoor fire pit, putting green, and hammock lounge at their fingertips. Varsity Club meets every need that you will have while in college so you can achieve what you came here for in an enjoyable atmosphere!
Your Perks
Pet friendly
Putting Green
Outdoor Fire Pit
CatBus Red Route
Hammock Garden
Ceiling fan
Keyless Entry
Gas Grilling Stations
Guest Parking
Resident Parking
Location to Campus
Online Payments Available
Your Space
Quartz Countertops
Open Concept Living Space
Stainless steel appliances
Luxury Vinyl Flooring
Private Bathrooms
Roommate Matching
9' Ceilings
Full Size In-Unit Washer and Dryer
Craftsman Style Architecture
Large Covered Front Porch
Walk In Closet
Smart TV Included
Another place
From our fully furnished apartments with state-of-the-art amenities, to our game-changing outreach opportunities and activities, EPOCH was built with purpose and backed by service that puts student success above all else. The result? An entire community that cares more, does more, and, ultimately, lives more.
You deserve to love where you live. And with state-of-the-art micro-communities of cottages, brownstones, townhomes and luxury flat apartments to choose from, you will.
Lakefront. Pet-friendly. Study-savvy. Purpose-built. At EPOCH, you’ll find the features, amenities, events and spaces you need in the kind of community you want
BOAT SLIPS
SWIM
HAMMOCK FARM
SAND VOLLEYBALL
BASKETBALL COURT
THE LAWN
EAT
EPOCH LIVE
SIP
PRIVATE SHUTTLES
POOL
MEET
RESIDENT SERVICES
FIT
STUDY
ROOFTOP TERRACES
TAN (SPRAY)
DOG PARK
LOUNGE
YOGA
the three who voted for should be disbarred (defrocked?).
(disrobed?)
None one wants to see those three disrobed.
Only disbarred.
Indeed! And the Constitution explicitly forbids cruel and unusual punishment, so it wouldn't even be Constitutional!
I'm sure SOMEONE does. There are a lot of sick puppies out there...
Disemboweled
I'd take defenestrated.
Is defenestrate like inflammable? Personally, I would vote for fenestrate, especially if the window is at least 10 floors up.
I presume "fenestrate" means to throw someone back in through a window...
Outstanding X 2
Outstanding
Defenestrated?
[Edit] Oops, N-CW beat me to it.
This is shaping up to be a good week at SCOTUS, and a shitty one for the Biden Administration. May that trend continue.
embarked on a 10-month boondoggle
More like 50-years
For student loan forgiveness - Why not just ask the colleges themselves to refund the money? No government action required.
The colleges should be making the loans. Their endowments can back them up. Then you’d see fiscal discipline.
Agreed.
But how does that grow a voting base?
And degrees that are worth a damn and with students’ toes held to the fire to get it done
(Damn autocorrect)
Why not ask all the folks who are whining about this decision to chip in a few bucks?
Go for it. You think colleges care about the students anymore. Personally, I think that should be what colleges do - loans to their students. But then they would have to cut the admin horde, and all the feelings horde.
Colleges are nothing more than "for profit diploma mills", People graduate with useless unmarketable degrees and then whine like children because they have to pay the loan back.
Look, the government has been paying universities to develop propaganda and indoctrinate students, and they have delivered. No fair asking them to refund their payments.
Take it out of college pension funds.
For sound economic perspective go to https://honesteconomics.substack.com/
Mr. Biden and his advisors certainly knew this would be the outcome. But it still provided political advantages: it served to influence votes towards the Democrat party in the 2022 midterms, and in defeat, it provides talking points for the left against the "extremists" on the SCOTUS and the GOP in general. This behavior is standard political fair and is practiced by both parties, but the Democrats seem to get far more mileage out of it.
"but the Democrats seem to get far more mileage out of it."
One need only look at the majority of who staffs schools K thru university level, major media and the entertainment industry to understand why.
Yes, it served to blunt the Red Wave in 2022. Unlike with the abortion ruling, SCOTUS made this ruling long before an election. By 2024, the moochers will be on to some new "outrage."
That’s because they control the media and education systems. That institutional control enables them to make their own preferences seem normal because that’s all their acolytes ever hear. Propaganda works. That’s why successful l radical regimes start by controlling the media and education systems.
How many times does Biden have to try to flout constitutional norms before he is considered a grave danger to our Constitutional order?
Just asking.
Right up until the moment he says "Make America Great Again"
That's right, "Let's go Brandon!"
And he's so brain-addled, he might just do that!
One could argue that the constitutional norm was a toilet paper use case, before the ink was dry.
Finally! A Supreme Court that is willing to strike down unconstitutional actions by government. Now if only they would strike down unconstitutional laws like the Student Loan Program we'd all be a lot better off! This is something, at least, no matter how small. Baby steps in the right direction is better than nothing at all.
Thank Trump!
^+1.
And fuck the TDS-addled shits who gave us droolin' Joe.
It has been a good week for individual and private property rights (regardless of how the Supremes got there). Whodathunk? Will it last. or is it just the one step back before the next two steps forward?
don’t you mean
"before the great leap forward?"
The horrible thing about this decision is that it wasn't unanimous. The fact that three justices were going to allow a completely unconstitutional action to take place is awful.
Awful, but completely unsurprising. The leftwing justices are culture warriors first and foremost. You see far more jurisprudential disagreement among the so-called conservative justices.
Would you say the same about the activist judges in the DC v Heller case?
What are you considering activist in the ruling?
Anything that lets the plain language of the constitution stand.
The fact that it recognized the plain language of the second amendment, which isn't what he wanted.
It’s Tony; what do you expect?
SOMEBODY TAKE CARE OF ME, PLEASE!
Where's the activist judges there? Reading shall not be infringed literally does not make one an activist judge.
There should be a reality show where a Tony is forced to live in Iran for a year.
They justices supported the first amendment as written. How is that activist? Please explain?
District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. It ruled that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms—unconnected with service in a militia—for traditionally lawful purposes such as self-defense within the home, and that the District of Columbia’s handgun ban and requirement that lawfully owned rifles and shotguns be kept “unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock” violated this guarantee.
Oh, there is a tremendous amount of jurisprudential disagreement between the conservative judges versus the progressive judges.
The left leaning judges are much more monolithic in their positions than those on the right.
Right, that's what I'm saying. My apologies if I wasn't clear.
Nope. I was just agreeing with you.
Maybe now Biden and his handlers will make some moves toward packing the court, for benefit of "democracy." That's a frightening thought!
They should be, and may yet be, impeached.
One, the standing was complete bullshit.
But two, fair. It's up to our incompetent Congress to actually dole money out to the people of this country sometimes instead of companies and rich fucks. Fat chance that'll happen.
Correction. The current principal of standing is bullshit. States should always have standing. They are first in line for suits. If a judge can't find a suitable example for standing it they should allow it.
Biden signing an EO to hire his son for 10 billion a year would theoretically not be able to be adjudicated due to standing. Which is why current jurisprudence on standing is bullshit.
A court saying that someone doesn't have "standing" is the same as it saying: "Holy shit, I don't want to get involved in that!"
When it comes to "standing" in a case involving the Constitution, everyone mentioned in the first seven words of the document should be included.
As a reminder: "We the People of the United States..."
That's who was supposed to be protected from government.
Absolutely true.
I'm wondering if any court will be bold enough one day to start tossing election results for which Congress fails to meet their guarantee of "a Republican form of government" (i.e. fails to do their duty by rejecting any State election results for which ironclad proof are not provided, which is impossible with mail in voting nor photo ID at the polls).
It’s up to our incompetent Congress to actually dole money out to the people of this country sometimes instead of companies and rich fucks.
Only within its Constitutional limits.
Got a cite for that, IncelJeffy?
Yes every taxpayer had standing.
Fuck off and die, shitforlunch.
The got the the sheep vote in 2020, so mission accomplished.
But is 17 months enough for them to forgive (or forget) when their votes are needed again?
Silly me. The average liberal college grad has trouble remembering coffee orders.
Supreme Court Quoted Pelosi In Decision That Killed Biden’s Student Debt Cancellation
The Chief Justice went on to use a statement made by Pelosi to bolster his point, noting that she had agreed Biden had the authority to make some changes in the time or manner that payments were made, but not to waive them altogether.
“People think that the President of the United States has the power for debt forgiveness. He does not,” she said in July of 2021. “He can postpone. He can delay. But he does not have that power. That has to be an act of Congress.”
In other words Biden is not a dictator, yet, let's keep it that way!
"In other words Biden is not a dictator, yet, let’s keep it that way!"
For that matter, he's not legally a President yet, either. That doesn't seem to deter Demunists in the least.
Oh darn, you mean I have to actually honor the contract I signed? Bummer man.
Contract obligations are white supremacy and institutional racism.
There are conditions where contracts can become invalid, and the signatories no longer have to honor the contract as written.
Indeed, one major way debts can become invalid is to declare bankruptcy -- but Congress pretty much took that off the table for student loans years ago.
I personally think that student loans should be bankruptable, and colleges should be on the hook for part of the loan when that happens for economic reasons (and not because the student became disabled or otherwise unable to pay loans in general!).
A student, walking out the college doors, with a huge debt, and no lob, is immediately in line to declare bankruptcy, and the seven years to regain credit worthiness is nothing to them.
If discharge is permitted, almost every student loan would go that way.
As well as being a death knell for colleges, I'm failing to see the downside actually. Everything a college proposed to teach can be learned for the price of an Internet connection. A college gives you a social signal of acceptability and conformity rather than skills at this point. Don't believe me, then trust the experts at the CDC.
Putting aside that a college student with no job already has ways to reduce those payments to account for starting out small and then grow into larger payments, the possibility of "instant bankruptcy" should be incentive for colleges to keep their tuition down, and keep their degrees affordable -- particularly when the college is on the hook for that bankruptcy.
Why in the world do colleges get away with charging $40,000 a year in tuition? Particularly when many of these degrees aren't exactly in line with making $40,000/year after graduation?
These distortions of the marker are a direct result of the Government making it very easy to get even large student loans -- and the very fact that students can get in such great amounts of debt, with dubious prospects for finding work afterwards, shines a spotlight on the Great Lie that everyone should go to college at any cost pursuing any degree that strikes one's fancy so they can enter the middle class and prosper.
They get away with charging that because folks like you pay it.
And folks like me paid for it because getting student loans was very "hand-wavy". The Federal Government should never have created this program in the first place -- and schools should never have pushed "college for everyone!".
Colleges have lied to us. Why shouldn't they be on the hook for their lies?
"...I personally think that student loans should be bankruptable..."
I personally think you're an ignoramus too stupid to understand the result of what you propose.
I have a PhD in mathematics. I have gobs of student loan debt. I have been working as a software engineer, off and on (due to the instability of the industry), currently wondering how I am going to survive nearly a year of unemployment right now. I am not suggesting that student loans should be bankruptable from ignorance.
I am very aware that the College Tuition market was already rather distorted when I was in college, and has gotten significantly worse in the decade and a half since.
What I would propose would end skyrocketing tuition (at 10x the rate of inflation), it would force colleges to reduce tuition, fire the massive increase of administrators that have been absorbing that higher tuition, and push colleges to make sure that their students are employable after they graduate. It would force students to consider whether college is even the right choice for them, or whether they should pursue vocational training instead.
Yes, this proposal could very well cause some colleges and universities to implode. At this point, I would consider that a feature, and not a bug.
"I have a PhD in mathematics. [...] I am not suggesting that student loans should be bankruptable from ignorance...."
OK, then, how about stupidity?
Seriously, is your imagination so limited that you couldn't think of any solution to the bankruptcy issue, other than "it should be practically forbidden, except for cases of extreme disability or death"?
Say, for example, "Wait seven or 10 years for the student to have time to establish a career, and then put bankruptcy on the table?"
What makes student loans so magically special that only students should shoulder all of the risk? Even with mortgages, car payments, and business loans, if a borrower becomes insolvent, they can find some relief -- at the cost of those who are owed the money.
The very fact that student loan providers don't have to shoulder any risk is a major reason we're in this mess in the first place.
You have $65k in student loan debt. That's like a new car. You should be able to pay that.
Of course, you shouldn't have any debt as a math Ph.D. in the first place.
I have never owned a new car in my entire life. I doubt I would ever have been able to afford the payments at any stage in my life.
As for having "no debt" as a math PhD, besides the fact that I ended up with that much debt going to a State graduate school, I'd like to know what magical sources of income there are that are automatically given to every mathematician who earns a PhD. Apparently, I'm missing out on something. (And it hasn't been due to lack of searching.)
And I consider myself one of the lucky ones. I've at least been able to carve out some semblance of a career as a software engineer.
SCOTUS has been pretty awesome since the Trump Administration.
And completely predictable; Democrats don't give a sh*t about Democracy or the US Constitution (USA); all they care about is how much Gov-Gun "armed-theft" they can get away with. Just because they have won seats in US politics doesn't exempt them from being criminals.
ALL democrats are criminals.
"...Nancy Pelosi agrees..."
Stopped clocks, blind squirrels.
What is most telling is that the liberal justices are whining about limiting Biden's presidential powers by executive order, while two out of the three that were on the court voted to limit Trump's presidential powers at every turn during every legal suit on a Trump executive order. That tells you they don't respect the Constitution and are totally political.That is a travesty for this country.
This is not even vaguely surprising, unfortunately.
Biden breathes a sign of relief. (and not debt relief)
"Major Questions" may be Roberts' great gift to the American people. This doctrine may not kill off the Administrative State, but it looks promising to clip its wings!
Now it's time for Congress to step up to the plate and start being clear about the limitations of what it intends when it comes up with these laws and loopholes.
Boo to Sotomayor for failing to understand that our Constitution limits the authority and power of government; a check for $10 can not be increased to $100 because the teller at the bank thinks it would be a good idea.
The $10 can be reduced to $0.02 if the teller is the Federal reserve.
And, BTW, a rousing "THANK YOU!" to Donald Trump!
Further, an "up yours" to the TDS-addled shits who gave us droolin' Joe.
but biden has already announced that he'll work around this and do it anyway. he would never take the direction from the court to work with congress. there will need to be another case before scotus on this matter. biden will not relent.
Sleepy Joe can pay back the student loans with all the bribe money he and Hunter accepted.
If students can't repay their loans, it's because their universities granted them useless degrees and overcharged them; let them recover the money from the universities, not from tax payers.
Or maybe it's just because they chose to get a useless degree that cost too much and should take responsibility for their choice. I'll go along with fraudulent advertising justice; but usually it's the students own stupidity that is responsible.
Sociology departments shouldn’t exist.
Very possibly the worst. promoting "gender studies", wymyn studies and other such rubbish.
Plenty of other people with useless degrees .
Or maybe they just hope the gov't will hand out free money.
I think your "maybe" is far more correct than mine. I know personally more than a dozen women who go to college JUST for the ?free? money and nothing else. ZERO desire to learn anything.
This is a huge win for Biden. Now he can campaign on the same bullshit again in 2024 and get all those stupid college graduate votes.
you're a bit of an idiot aren't you ?
someone should tell these lazy queers to earn their forgiveness, like their baby-boomer and x--gen parents before them....hehe
Did you just show up to prove how stupid someone can be?
Luxury Homestay in kasauli
https://www.merakiholidayhomes.com/
The Supreme Court ruled properly against Biden's plan to buy votes with the taxpayer's money. Affirmative Action ruling was another.
The Bidens know no limit to their criminality, corruption and lack of moral standing. The Bidens know and understand that people can be bought with the right amount of cash and drugs.
Colleges have become "for profit" diploma mills, handing out useless degrees in such trash subjects as "gender studies" wymyn's studies" "hospitality" "Creative arts" along with a myriad of other completely useless and unmarketable degrees that no business would ever think of hiring.
To make matters worse Gen Z are lazy, have poor or literally no, good work habits and expect to be treated like royalty.
They all need a swift kick in the ass.
As if there weren’t enough reasons to shoot this down, the picture of those smug childish bastards protesting should do it.
To Hades