Connect with us

Published

on

President Biden’s student loan relief plan faces a do-or-die moment on Tuesday as it reaches the Supreme Court for oral arguments. 

The up to $20,000 in debt relief that could go to millions of Americans faces two challenges: one from six Republican-led states, Biden v. Nebraska, and another from two student loan borrowers, Department of Education v. Brown. 

Biden’s plan to save one of his biggest campaign promises hinges on two arguments. 

The administration says that Education Secretary Miguel Cardona had the authority to forgive the debt under the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students (HEROES) Act.

But legal observers suggest the closer question could be whether the justices reach the merits at all. The Biden administration contends that neither group of challengers has standing, meaning the legal capacity to sue.

With the lower courts placing the plan on hold, the Biden administration now must face a conservative-majority Supreme Court in its efforts to give borrowers relief. 

Here is what you need to know about the legal issues in the two student debt relief cases: What is the HEROES Act?

The Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students, or HEROES, Act has only recently come back into focus, but it was passed two decades ago with bipartisan support as the country headed to war following the 9/11 terror attacks.

The law gives the education secretary authority to “waive or modify” federal student financial assistance programs “as the Secretary deems necessary in connection with a war or other military operation or national emergency.”

The Trump administration began using HEROES Act authority to pause student loan payments after declaring the coronavirus pandemic a national emergency in 2020.

After Biden took office, his administration extended the emergency and the payment pause before announcing the debt relief plan last year. 

The administration has said the HEROES Act’s plain text authorizes Cardona to forgive the debts, and that his decision to do so was reasonable. He has put forward data showing that many borrowers are at risk of defaulting on their loans if the payment pause ends without the debt relief.

“The federal government provides relief to people affected by crises all the time, and that relief flows not just immediately after the crisis, but in the months and years afterwards,” said Jonathan Miller, chief program officer at the Public Rights Project, which filed a brief supporting the administration on behalf of local governments.

“So I think this is a perfectly reasonable and appropriate step for the Secretary to take, given all the information that was before him in the department at the time,” Miller added.

After the Supreme Court took up the challenges, Biden announced the COVID-19 emergency will end in May, but the administration says that doesn’t affect its debt relief plan.

Meanwhile, the administration has argued that ending the emergency moots a separate Supreme Court case involving Title 42, which limits migrants’ ability to seek asylum on public health grounds.

But the White House believes student debt relief is different because it concerns economic consequences that will persist beyond the emergency, rather than stopping the spread of disease, according to people familiar with the administration’s legal strategy.

“Our debt relief plan is needed to prevent defaults and delinquencies as student borrowers transition back to repayment after the end of the payment pause,” an administration official said. “The national emergency formally ending does not change that fact. It also does not change the legal justification for the plan.” How have the courts ruled so far?

Federal appeals courts have blocked the plan in both cases pending further action by the Supreme Court.

In the challenge from the conservative states — Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska and South Carolina — a three-judge panel on the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, all appointed by Republican presidents, issued a temporary injunction in the fall. 

A federal trial judge in Texas ruled in favor of the individual challengers and separately blocked the debt relief plan in November. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals later upheld that ruling.

The Biden administration appealed both cases to the Supreme Court, and the justices agreed in December to take up both cases. What do the plan’s opponents say?

Both groups of challengers contend Cardona overstepped his authority under the HEROES Act.

The individual borrowers argue he was required to provide a comment period on the proposal before implementing it.

Both groups argue the debt relief plan invokes the “major questions” doctrine, which requires Congress to speak clearly when authorizing an agency to decide matters of vast economic and political significance.

Echoing a lower court ruling, the plan’s critics assert that taking the administration’s position means the executive branch could cite the pandemic’s lingering effects even 10 years down the road to forgive the debts without consulting Congress.

“This case is not so much about the wisdom of that decision. It’s about in a democratic, self-governing society, how are we going to make these kinds of decisions?” said Casey Mattox, vice president for legal and judicial strategy at Americans for Prosperity, which filed an amicus brief supporting the challengers.

The court has cemented the major questions doctrine in three recent cases: stopping the Centers for Disease and Control and Prevention’s (CDC) eviction freeze during the pandemic, blocking the Biden administration’s vaccine-or-test mandate for large employers and striking down a power plant rule last June.

Thomas Berry, editor-in-chief of “Cato Supreme Court Review” at the Cato Institute, which filed an amicus brief siding with the challengers, said the precedents give a clear indication that a majority of the justices will be skeptical of the debt relief plan.

“If they reach the merits, I would be fairly confident that the action will be struck down,” Berry said. “I think the closer question is whether they reach the merits at all.” Biden admin argues challengers lack standing to sue

The Biden administration believes none of the plaintiffs have standing to challenge the debt relief.

Three states cited economic impacts from how some borrowers are now consolidating their loans, and four said their tax revenues will take a hit. 

Missouri shows perhaps the most compelling theory by arguing the plan will harm its student loan service, legal observers say, but the administration is likely to push back that any harm is still speculative.

“I just don’t think it really comports here, because it’s very clear that loan forgiveness ultimately is a net benefit for the states,” said Miller.

His group’s brief argues that forgiveness would make it easier for borrowers to start a business or own a home, spurring economic growth. Republicans request documents from Biden’s Supreme Court commission Appeals court rules North Carolina can’t ban undercover cameras from PETA

The two individual borrowers, who did not qualify for the relief, contend that they can bring their suit because Cardona’s failure to provide a comment period unfairly deprived them of a concrete interest.

The Biden administration asserts stopping the debt relief would not redress their injury, a component needed for standing.

“That judgment leaves Brown’s financial position unchanged; she would still receive no loan forgiveness,” the administration wrote in its brief. “And it would leave Taylor worse off than before; he would receive neither the $10,000 the plan provides nor the $20,000 he purports to seek, but instead nothing at all.”

Continue Reading

World

Europe must ‘ramp up’ pressure on Russia, says No 10 after Coalition of the Willing meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy

Published

on

By

Europe must 'ramp up' pressure on Russia, says No 10 after Coalition of the Willing meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy

Europe must “ramp up” pressure on Russia “to bring an end to this barbaric war”, a Downing Street spokesperson said after Sir Keir Starmer chaired a meeting with the Coalition of the Willing.

Earlier, the prime minister met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz at Downing Street for crisis talks on the future of Ukraine.

After the Downing Street meeting, a spokesperson said Sir Keir “convened a call with other European allies alongside President Zelenskyy”.

“The leaders all agreed that now is a critical moment and that we must continue to ramp up support to Ukraine and economic pressure on Putin to bring an end to this barbaric war.”

Ukraine latest: ‘Critical stage’ in push for peace

Friedrich Merz, Sir Keir Starmer, Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Emmanuel Macron at Downing Street. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Friedrich Merz, Sir Keir Starmer, Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Emmanuel Macron at Downing Street. Pic: Reuters

During the earlier meeting, the Downing Street spokesperson said that the leaders “discussed the importance of the US-led peace talks for European security and supported the progress made”.

All four “underscored the need for a just and lasting peace in Ukraine, which includes robust security guarantees,” the spokesperson added.

“The leaders agreed that, while diplomatic efforts continue, Europe must stand with Ukraine, strengthening its ability to defend against relentless attacks that have left thousands without heat or light,” they said.

“They also discussed positive progress made to use immobilised Russian sovereign assets to support Ukraine’s reconstruction.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Mr Zelenskyy arrives at Downing Street

After arriving in the UK, Mr Zelenskyy said in a post on Telegram that “we are joining our efforts to end this war with a decent peace for Ukraine” and that “security must be guaranteed”.

He later said: “We can’t manage without Americans, we can’t manage without Europe and that is why we need to make some important decisions.”

The discussions come as US President Donald Trump accused Mr Zelenskyy of having failed to read the latest peace plan.

He said he was “a little disappointed” in the Ukrainian leader, while insisting Russia’s Vladimir Putin was “fine with it”.

Mr Trump’s eldest son had earlier told Sky’s lead world news presenter Yalda Hakim in an interview that his father may walk away from the Ukraine peace process.

When asked directly if he believed the US president would walk away from Ukraine, he answered: “I think he may, what’s good about my father and what’s unique about my father is you don’t know what he’s going to do. He’s unpredictable.”

Pic: Reuters
Image:
Pic: Reuters

Sir Keir had earlier insisted any ceasefire must be “just” and “lasting”, adding: “We are at a critical stage in the push for peace.

“The principles remain the same. We stand with Ukraine, and if there is to be a ceasefire, it needs to be a just and lasting ceasefire.”

Mr Macron had insisted Ukraine’s allies have “a lot of cards” – but the main issue was to “finalise these peace negotiations” and find the “best possible conditions for Ukraine, for the Europeans, and for collective security”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Why the meeting in London is important

Moments after arriving at Downing Street, Mr Merz said he was “sceptical about some of the details in documents coming from the US” but that was one of the reasons for Monday’s talks.

The four European leaders emerged from Downing Street at around 2.20pm for a group photo – but declined to answer any questions from the media.

Sir Keir and Mr Zelenskyy then went back inside the prime minister’s residence for further talks while Mr Macron and Mr Merz departed.

Read more from Sky News:
Paramount launches hostile takeover bid for Warner Bros
Host of British stars nominated for Golden Globes

The London meeting comes after Mr Zelenskyy’s officials concluded three days of talks with US diplomats.

Over the weekend, Mr Zelenskyy said he had discussed “next steps” with Mr Trump’s advisers and was “determined to keep working in good faith”.

According to Vatican sources, the Ukrainian president will next meet with Pope Leo at Castel Gandolfo, the papal residence outside of Rome, on Tuesday morning.

Continue Reading

World

Israeli government accused of intimidation and harassment after raid on UN building in Jerusalem

Published

on

By

Israeli government accused of intimidation and harassment after raid on UN building in Jerusalem

The Israeli government has been accused of intimidation, harassment and a “blatant disregard” of its obligations by the United Nations after Israeli officials raided a UN building in Jerusalem.

Police officers, along with officials from the town council, entered the East Jerusalem compound of UNRWA, the UN agency that provides services to Palestinian refugees.

The compound has been empty since January, when the Israeli government ordered UNRWA to close the building, accusing the agency of being “infested” with members of Hamas.

The United Nations denied that accusation vehemently.

Read more: What were UNRWA workers in Gaza accused of?

Having gained entry to the compound, the officials filled vehicles with possessions, including office furniture, and raised an Israeli flag in place of the United Nations flag.

They claimed that the building had been raided because UNRWA owed around hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of local taxes.

More on Hamas

However, under the UN charter, UN buildings are exempt from such taxes and are also considered “inviolable”, meaning that, rather than raiding the building, Israel has an obligation to protect it.

Since its staff were told to leave, there have been attempts to break into the compound, which has been secured by a team of guards employed by the UN.

Sky News has been told that, when the Israeli officials arrived on Monday morning, the security guards were detained in a room within the compound.

“We didn’t let them in when they first came to the compound, but they cut the chains and the locks and took control,” said George, the head of security, who was standing outside the front gate when we arrived.

“They told my guards to stay in one room, took their phones from them, and told them they couldn’t leave.”

‘The false accusations led to this’

UNRWA’s commissioner-general, Philippe Lazzarini, said the raid was “a blatant disregard of Israel’s obligation as a United Nations Member State to protect and respect the inviolability of UN premises”.

He said that failing to cooperate with UN agencies “represent a new challenge to international law, one that creates a dangerous precedent anywhere else the UN is present across the world”.

His anger was not isolated. Outside the gates of the UNRWA compound, we met Hakam Shahwam, who used to work here as UNRWA’s chief of staff. It was, he said, “a very sad day”.

Shahwam says the claims that UNRWA was a breeding ground for Hamas had led to the raid.

He told me: “The false accusations led to this. This is a shameful day, not only for the United Nations but also for the government of Israel.

“There must be a strong protest, and a response from the international community. This is unacceptable.”

Read more from Adam Parsons:
Gaza longs for normality, but quasi-anarchy reigns
Israeli forces kill two Palestinians after apparent surrender

‘It is time for UNRWA to be dismantled’

The Israeli government remains adamant that its criticism of UNRWA is justified.

When I asked Shosh Bedrosian, a spokesperson for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, about the raid, she said: “UNRWA is a stain on the United Nations.”

She added: “It is time for UNRWA to be dismantled. It is not part of the solution for Gaza, it is part of the problem.”

She did not comment on the legality of the raid, or on Israel’s ongoing commitment to the UN Charter.

Continue Reading

World

Greek farmers have forced shutdown of Crete airport

Published

on

By

Greek farmers have forced shutdown of Crete airport

Greek farmers angered by delayed subsidy payments have shut down the international airport on Crete and clashed with riot police.

Images from local media showed dozens of farmers standing on the apron at Nikos Kazantzakis International Airport in Heraklion, the largest city on Crete.

Pic: Reuters
Image:
Pic: Reuters


The airport was forced to suspend all flights, while fights between protesters and riot police broke out in Chania, the Greek island’s second-largest city, where two people were reportedly injured.

Officers used tear gas to disperse protesting farmers who pelted them with rocks and overturned a police patrol car, according to local media.

Pics: AP
Image:
Pics: AP

The protests were sparked after delays in the payment of European Union-backed agricultural subsidies, which followed a scandal over fraudulent subsidy claims.

Authorities are reviewing all requests for EU farm subsidies, which protesters argue amount to collective punishment and leave farmers in debt and unable to plant their fields for next season.

Meanwhile, Greece’s farming sector has been hit by an outbreak of goat and sheep pox, leading to a mass cull of livestock.

More on European Union

Farmers have since deployed thousands of tractors and other agricultural vehicles at border crossings and key points along highways across the country, as well as ports and airports.

Read more from Sky News:
Nurse in transgender doctor row wins part of employment tribunal
Starmer holds crisis talks for ‘decent peace for Ukraine’
‘Danger to life’ warning as Storm Bram hits UK and Ireland

Pics: Reuters
Image:
Pics: Reuters

Michalis Chrisochoidis, Greek minister for public order, said last week that the government remained open to talks with protest leaders, but warned it wouldn’t tolerate the shutdown of major transit points.

It comes after riot police fired tear gas at protesting farmers attempting to block the main access road to the international airport outside the northern Greek city of Thessaloniki on Friday.

Elsewhere, police have been enforcing traffic diversions in several parts of northern and central Greece, while farmer roadblocks at the country’s northern borders with Bulgaria, Turkey and North Macedonia have hampered truck traffic.

Protests by farmers are common in Greece, and similar blockades in the past have sometimes severed all road traffic between the north and south of the country for weeks.

Continue Reading

Trending