![]() "Why didn't the state just make MOHELA come then?" she asked. "In short, none of the various theories of standing asserted by the States in this case overcomes the fundamental Article III problem with this lawsuit."ĭuring the oral arguments for the student-debt-relief cases in February, Barrett joined liberal justices in scrutinizing whether the states could name the Missouri-based student-loan company MOHELA in the lawsuit even after the company itself denied involvement. And when a State asserts, for example, that a federal law has produced only those kinds of indirect effects, the State's claim for standing can become more attenuated," Kavanaugh wrote in his opinion in the immigration case. "But in our system of dual federal and state sovereignty, federal policies frequently generate indirect effects on state revenues or state spending. Texas decision, one of Kavanaugh's footnotes directly addresses an argument similar to the one the six GOP-led states made in their case regarding how the student-loan forgiveness would harm their revenues. How recent rulings are a student-debt-relief indicator Jemal Countess/Getty Images for People's Rally to Cancel Student Deb Student-loan borrowers and advocates gather for the People's Rally for Student Debt Cancellation on February 28 in Washington, DC. Brackeen, in which the state of Texas was among the petitioners that challenged the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 that allowed Native American children to stay with Native American families in custody battles. ![]() Last week, the conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett authored an opinion in the case Haaland v. If they fail to demonstrate those harms, the court will throw out the case.Īnd that's what the Supreme Court has done with two recent rulings. To prove standing, plaintiffs have to show that the policy would injure them, that the injury directly traces back to the defendant, and that the relief they're seeking would address those injuries. While both parties claimed they would suffer various forms of harm from student-loan forgiveness, the court's decision on the cases could come down to whether the plaintiffs have standing to sue in the first place. Nebraska, was brought on by six Republican-led states who argued the relief would hurt their states' tax revenues and the revenue of the student-loan company MOHELA. Brown, because they did not qualify for the full $20,000 of debt relief. Two student-loan borrowers brought on one of the cases, US Department of Education v. In February, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the two lawsuits that paused the implementation of Biden's plan to cancel up to $20,000 in student debt for federal borrowers. It often indicates a user profile.Īnother week went by without a Supreme Court decision on President Joe Biden's student-loan-forgiveness plan - but some recent rulings from the high court could be an indicator of how it's handling pending cases. Account icon An icon in the shape of a person's head and shoulders.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |