Supreme Court ruling on Biden’s student debt handout is much bigger than you think

Last week, the Supreme Court handed down three important decisions that have influenced public policy decisions for decades.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court ruled that the use of race in college admissions violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, a major blow to affirmative action in education.

On Friday, the Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 ruling that states cannot compel workers to promote messages contrary to their religious beliefs, a major victory for those who support religious liberty. became.

But Friday’s High Court decision Destroy President Biden’s plan To write off hundreds of billions of dollars in student loan debt that could prove to be the most important, but probably not for the reasons you think.

Biden’s Supreme Court Rebuke of Student Loan Socialism Is a Victory for All Americans

In Biden v. Nebraska, the Supreme Court ruled that the administration’s attempt to “cancel” $10,000 in student loan debt for Americans earning less than $125,000 a year and up to $20,000 for Pell grant recipients was illegal. made a judgment that it was

The primary issue in this lawsuit centers on provisions contained in the Hero Act of 2003, which instructs the Department of Education to “enforce statutory or regulatory provisions applicable to student financial assistance programs under Title 4 of the Act.” give the right to waive or change. [Education Act] As deemed necessary by the Secretary in connection with war or other military operations or national emergencies. ”

For the first time since the bill’s passage, the Biden administration has attempted to use its “forgive or modify” powers to write off a huge amount of student loan debt. Until now, it has been used only in very limited situations, such as exemption from the obligation to submit documents for students’ requests for leave of absence.

The impact of Mr. Biden’s plan to end student loans would have been enormous. As the Supreme Court said in its ruling, “The Department of Education estimates that the program will cover 98.5% of all borrowers,” at a cost of $430 billion.

And the potential impact on future debt cancellation plans and student behavior may have been even greater. If Biden is allowed to write off $430 billion in student loan debt overnight, what will stop him and future presidential administrations from “cancelling” even more student loan debt? ?

Moreover, how would young Americans change how they spend their money and choose colleges if they knew that their costs could ultimately be paid for by other taxpayers and government debt? ?

New Poll Reveals Americans’ Standings on Scotus’ Affirmative Action, Student Loan and Religious Freedom Decisions

The aftermath of Mr. Biden’s debt cancellation program will surely be felt for years. But as important as these concerns are, the Supreme Court’s ruling is far more important than simply addressing the direct and indirect costs of a student loan cancellation plan. Biden v. Nebraska will likely influence a number of future executive actions by the president and his executive branches, not just those involving the Department of Education.

Biden v. Nebraska’s main legal battle isn’t over student loan debt, executive authority to use vague language in law to enact sweeping reforms without requiring congressional action It was about

The Biden administration has tried to argue that broad legislative language can be used to do just about anything the federal government wants, as the Obama administration and other liberal governments have done in the past.

Therefore, when the Heroes Act authorizes the Department of Education to “waive or change any statutory or regulatory provision applicable to student financial assistance programs under Title 4 of the Act,” [Education Act]The White House interprets this as the potential for Biden to create a huge and expensive debt cancellation program that no one in Congress who voted for the Heroes Act 20 years ago could have imagined. meant.

This far-left view of legislation will open the door to endless abuses of power and expansion of government planning. For example, if Biden had won this case, who would say he wouldn’t have finally written off all his student loan debt or given every American college student $10,000 in cash to help with living expenses? Is not it? Indeed, both of these reforms could be described as “amendments” to the law.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE OPINIONS NEWSLETTER

Thankfully, the Supreme Court has dismissed this radical approach to rulemaking. Instead, it duly determined that Congress was the only constitutional agency tasked with enacting new legislation, including legislation introducing new student loan forgiveness programs. Regulators cannot impose such reforms, whether they are profitable or not, unless Congress has given them clear and specific authority to issue reforms. While courts have leaned further left in the past, this has not always been the case.

Chief Justice John Roberts, speaking for the majority, declared that “the term ‘waiver or amendment’ does not mean ‘totally rewrite’,” and that “this is not to say that one branch of government It is a case of arrogant treatment of the powers belonging to the .

Mr. Roberts is right. There is absolutely no evidence that the Republican-led Congress and Republican presidents who passed the Hero Act in 2003 intended to give future presidents the power to write off massive student loan debt. And no honest and sensible person would ever think that “amend” means “rewrite the law to suit your own convenience, regardless of the cost.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Of course, the far left doesn’t care what the Congress intended in 2003, nor does it want to ensure that the legislature actually enacts legislation. For the far left, all that matters is that the ends be achieved, whatever the means.

Americans finally have a Supreme Court that stands firm against such extreme efforts. I hope that never changes.

Click here to read more about Justin Haskins