Biden may extend student loan payment suspension again with pardon plan in court

The White House is reportedly considering again extending the student loan payment pause which is currently set to expire at the end of the year, as President Joe Biden’s plan to forgive up to $20,000 in student debt for borrowers makes facing a legal challenge from Republicans.

According at The Washington Posttwo people with knowledge of the matter say White House officials are in preliminary talks about a possible extension of the hiatus, although no decision has been made and it is unclear whether Biden has been involved in the talks.

“As the legal vulnerability has become increasingly clear, the White House has made increasingly firm plans to extend the loan repayment pause,” a source said. “The extension we’re likely to see is intended to ensure borrowers don’t have the rug pulled out from under them, rather than an indefinite replacement of loan forgiveness.”

When Biden announced the Student Loan Forgiveness Plan — to forgive $20,000 of debt for Pell Grant recipients or $10,000 for debtors who earn less than $125,000 a year — in August, he said his administration was extending the “one last time” payment break until December 31.

But following a lawsuit by six Republican-led states, the plan has been locked last week by Texas federal judge Mark Pittman and was temporarily barred by an injunction issued by several Republican appointees 8th Circuit Court of Appeals judges this week.

It is likely that the plan will end up in the Supreme Court. From there, the fate of the plan is uncertain. Regardless of whether or not the plan is overturned by the conservative-dominated Supreme Court, however, it could be months before a decision is made.

If the moratorium is not extended, borrowers could be stuck in limbo, unsure whether to start repaying loans when they could be canceled anyway or risk default if the plan is finally canceled by the Court.

Supporters of debt cancellation say extending the moratorium is a minimum step Biden can take in response to court rulings.

“For three years, borrowers have been a political punching bag in the face of uncertainty about the future of their student loans. The judge’s decision makes the future even more worrying. said Natalia Abrams, president of the Student Debt Crisis Center in a report. “President Biden must suspend payments further into the future to provide financial stability and peace of mind for 40 million Americans.”

The Debt Collective says Biden has several options to provide relief to borrowers. They called the president extend the moratorium indefinitely and say he can Cancel student debt using another legal route to circumvent the current legal challenge. The group also says it can and should just ignore Pittman’s decision because canceling student debt is a political choice that shouldn’t be subject to court rulings to begin with.

“The problem is not the legal authority [to cancel student debt]. The authority is on solid ground,” the Debt Collective said. wrote on Twitter on Monday. “The problem is that the courts are rigged. Right-wing judges take sides in political debates that no one elected them to resolve. Biden should ignore them.

Indeed, legal experts have pointed out that there are vast and bizarre deficiencies in Pittman’s arguments.

pit man openly admitted that he did not know the basic principles of the cancellation program, contradicts his own arguments that plaintiffs recruited for the lawsuit by the GOP suffered damages as a result of the plan, and compared Congress granting the executive branch the power to cancel student debt to the law of 1933 who gave power to Adolf Hitler and the rise of the Nazi Party.

Some legal experts have disputed that Pittman took on the case – after all, all other challenges brought by conservatives challenging the plan was rejected by the courts, having been determined by the judges as a matter that should not be brought before the judiciary in the first place.

“[O]The objections to the Biden program present the classic type of “widespread grievance” that the Supreme Court has long ruled federal courts have no constitutional authority to resolve,” wrote CNN legal analyst Steve Vladeck. If judges adjudicate on the basis of their biases rather than established judicial rolls, writes Vladeck, then “courts do not act like courts; they just take sides in political debates that no one elected them to resolve.

Comments are closed.