'Massive new program': Supreme Court majority signals skepticism over Biden's student loan forgiveness plan
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court's conservative majority signaled deep skepticism Tuesday about President Joe Biden's plan to wipe out $400 billion in student loan debt for tens of millions of Americans, suggesting the president overstepped his powers under the law.
During the course of more than three hours of closely watched arguments, the justices prodded the Biden administration for answers about why the student loan plan was different from other emergency policies the White House attempted to implement in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic but were struck down.
In one of a series of troubling signs for the plan, Chief Justice John Roberts questioned a central premise of Biden's argument: that the president has authority to cancel student loans without explicit authority from Congress.
More: Supreme Court's conservative justices signal skepticism of Biden's loan forgiveness plan: Recap
More: Biden will be playing defense on student loans this week at the Supreme Court. Here's why.
"We take very seriously the idea of the separation of powers and that power should be divided to prevent its abuse," Roberts said at one point.
Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who along with Roberts is often viewed as sitting at the ideological center of the nation's highest court, chimed in with his own skepticism.
"Some of the biggest mistakes in the court's history were deferring to assertions of executive emergency power," Kavanaugh said. "Some of the finest moments in the court's history were pushing back against presidential assertions of emergency power."
The oral arguments do not always predict the outcome of a case, but they often give a sense of which direction a majority of the justices are leaning. A decision is expected by the end of June.
Biden announced the student loan program in August, honoring a campaign pledge he made before the 2020 election. About 26 million borrowers applied in the few weeks applications were open, and more than 16 million were approved before a pair of court decisions put the loan forgiveness effort on hold. The administration estimates 40 million people may be eligible, assuming the court doesn't strike the effort down.
The significance of the plan for millions of Americans was reflected outside the Supreme Court on Tuesday as hundreds of protesters gathered before arguments opened. Some carried signs that read "Cancel Student Debt." Others proclaimed that "Student debt cancellation is illegal." The crowd chanted phrases throughout the day such as "D-E-B-T, student debt is crushing me" and "Education is a right."
The turnout appeared to be the largest at the court since the justices heard arguments last year in two blockbuster cases dealing with whether universities may consider race as one factor in their admissions. Those cases are considered the most closely watched of the current term.
Eliana Reed, 26, said efforts to preserve Biden's debt relief program are a "no-brainer." That millions of Americans are subject to insurmountable debt they're unable to pay off "feels so obviously wrong," said Reed, who has about $17,000 in student debt.
Antwan McPherson and Justice Stanton, both 19, traveled to Washington from North Carolina to rally for student debt forgiveness – even though it would not apply to them.
The two students at North Carolina A&T are freshmen yet have already accumulated thousands in debt. "I've come to understand early how much debt I'll have if I continue on," said McPherson, a Chicago native.
Inside the court, the 6-3 conservative majority repeatedly returned to the idea that it is Congress that should approve such significant programs – not the president. Kavanaugh pressed the Biden administration on why the student loan program shouldn’t go the way of other, similar policies the court has struck down.
Congress "could have … referred to loan cancellation" in the law, Kavanaugh said. Instead, he said, the administration relied on "general language" in to create a "massive new program."
"That seems problematic," Kavanaugh said. “Why does this case not fit into that formula that we’ve seen before?"
Two of the high court's liberal justices, appearing to side with the Biden administration, pushed back on criticism from their conservative colleagues that the Biden student loan debt forgiveness program was unfair because it essentially punishes Americans who ultimately paid off their loans.
Roberts introduced a hypothetical situation of two high school graduates, neither of whom could afford college. One took out a loan to attend. The other started a lawn care business with help from a bank loan instead of going to college.
"At the end of four years, we know statistically, that the person with the college degree is going to do significantly financially better over the course of life than the person without," Roberts said. "And then along comes the government and tells that person, 'You don't have to pay your loan.'"
Associate Justice Elena Kagan stepped in and said: "Congress passed a statute that dealt with loan repayment for colleges, and it didn't pass a statute that dealt with loan repayment for lawn businesses. Americans can debate whether that was the right choice but that's Congress' choice."
The court paid far less attention to another major question: whether the correct people are involved in the cases. A threshold question the justices must decide is whether the states and the individual borrowers who sued over the plan were harmed by it – in other words, if they have standing to sue. If not, the court may never reach the central legal question of Biden's authority.
The most difficult questions on that point came from the liberal justices, who likely do not have the votes to garner the support of a majority of the justices.
The Supreme Court's conservatives have relied in past cases on what's known as the "major questions doctrine" to strike down significant regulations that are are not explicitly authorized in the law.
The plaintiffs in the student loan cases argued that the same doctrine should apply to the creation of the student loan program. The Biden administration argues that doctrine should not apply.
In another case decided on that doctrine, Biden was prevented from extending an eviction moratorium tied to the COVID-19 pandemic. The government relied on a 1944 law that gives health officials power to "make and enforce such regulations" as they deem necessary to prevent the spread of disease. But the Supreme Court struck down the moratorium in 2021, ruling Congress couldn't have contemplated the law leading to a halt of evictions.
Similarly, the Supreme Court last year ruled against a restriction on power plant emissions in a climate change case. Roberts, writing for a 6-3 majority, said the ability to impose a regulation "of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself."
The cases are Biden v. Nebraska and Department of Education v. Brown.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Supreme Court signals skepticism over Biden's student loan forgiveness