Anmerkungen:
Nach Informationen von SSRN wurde die ursprüngliche Fassung des Dokuments November 23, 2022 erstellt
Beschreibung:
Over the summer, President Biden announced a historic student debt relief plan that would cancel up to $20,000 in student debt for federal borrowers who make under $125,000 per year individually or under $250,000 per household. Since then, President Biden’s political opponents have filed frivolous lawsuit after lawsuit in hopes that one sticks and blocks relief. These sham lawsuits pose risks not only to the student loan cancellation program on the table but to the principle of separation of powers that is supposed to inform the judiciary’s decision-making overall. The application for debt relief was released in mid-October, and in just a few weeks more than 26 million borrowers applied. During that time, the Department of Education approved 16 million applications—leaving these borrowers a mere click away from relief. As millions of Americans with student debt jumped at the opportunity to finally be freed of their debt, in mid-November, a Trump-appointed judge in Texas struck down the President’s debt relief program—shutting the door to relief for millions. The court in that case, ironically entitled Brown v. Department of Education, was the first to rule against President Biden’s student debt relief plan. In fact, prior to the decision in Texas, every court had dismissed the case based upon a lack of 'standing'. The blog explores why this is important and what it means for the future of student debt cancellation