The U.S. Supreme Court will review a lower court decision that blocked a rule from former President Joe Biden’s administration that helps students who have been defrauded by their schools get their loans forgiven.
Under the borrower defense rule, the Biden administration forgave billions of dollars in student loans. Although the rule has existed for decades, the Biden administration revised it in 2022. Loan forgiveness is made possible under the program for those who were cheated by their education.
Politico claims that the rule may now be further restricted in light of the lower court’s decision.
“It simply means that the Supreme Court will hear arguments as to the scope of the Department of Education’s authority related to [the borrower defense rule],” Altmire told the outlet. “It remains to be seen how the incoming Trump administration will argue the government’s side of the case, but we strongly believe the facts of the case will show the Department’s onerous [borrower defense rule] went well beyond the agency’s authority.”
The Biden administration’s authority under the Higher Education Act of 1965 will be tested in this case.
When and how cheated students can receive compensation will be impacted by the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Despite legal challenges that have significantly weakened the administration’s efforts to forgive student debts, the Biden administration has campaigned for student loan relief, including the cancellation of loan debt.
On the campaign trail, Biden promised a plan to forgive student loans. His administration declared that it would work to eliminate the debt of $10,000 for each borrower and $20,000 for Pell Grant recipients.
Although the administration allowed loan forgiveness applications to remain open until shutting them in November 2022, several states filed lawsuits against Biden and the Department of Education over the proposal.
The Supreme Court then overturned the forgiveness plan in June 2023, handing the administration a serious setback just before the elections last year.
The majority of Republicans oppose student loan forgiveness, claiming that it is unjust to borrowers who have put in years of diligent effort to successfully and properly repay their debt. The project would be void if the Trump administration stopped defending several of the cases that are still pending.
The Supreme Court made headlines earlier this week when it declined to hear an appeal challenging Delaware’s ban on assault-style rifles and large-capacity ammunition magazines, as well as a case regarding Maryland’s handgun licensing requirements.
By doing so, the Court avoided addressing two significant cases involving the contentious issue of gun rights.
The justices turned away an appeal from a group of gun enthusiasts and firearm advocacy organizations, who sought to block Delaware’s ban on “assault weapons” and magazines capable of holding more than 17 rounds, following a lower court’s decision not to issue a preliminary injunction.
Such weapons have been used in several mass shootings in the U.S., but according to FBI crime states, the vast majority of gun-related homicides are committed with handguns.
The justices also declined to hear an appeal from the gun rights group Maryland Shall Issue and other plaintiffs, who were challenging a lower court’s ruling that upheld the state’s licensing law as consistent with the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment right to keep and bear weapons.
While the justices declined to hear these two cases, the court did not take action on two separate appeals challenging Maryland’s ban on assault weapons and one in Rhode Island regarding large-capacity ammunition magazines.
With its 6-3 conservative majority — three justices were picked by President-Elect Donald Trump during his first time in office — the Supreme Court has consistently adopted an originalist interpretation of gun rights in significant rulings dating back to 2008.
