|
TheScott2K posted:If they have something to announce on a Friday you're not gonna like it. SCOTUS declined to block it for another lawsuit at least https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/04/supreme-court-again-declines-to-block-bidens-student-loan-relief-plan.html
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 22:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 14:48 |
|
|
They're not going to do anything with the case til after the election.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 15:13
|
|
|
Thom12255 posted:They're not going to do anything with the case til after the election. Which will affect the election (but we couldn’t possibly affect the election by ruling)
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 16:48
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/mstratford/status/1590856666039607296?s=46&t=2VzIACBvV9Hx-0HJGxkxAg
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 01:04
|
|
|
B B posted:https://mobile.twitter.com/mstratford/status/1590856666039607296?s=46&t=2VzIACBvV9Hx-0HJGxkxAg It's illegal to have loans forgiven if you're not already rich, I guess. Won't be surprised if Indiana is next.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 01:29
|
|
|
So that's it then? Will appealing it accomplish anything?
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 01:44
|
|
|
Travic posted:So that's it then? Will appealing it accomplish anything? This one is worse because the fifth circuit is terrible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 02:08
|
|
|
For summary judgement to be awarded that is supposed to mean that the case was so clear and compelling that it’s not reasonable to continue to hear more. It seems unlikely to me that the WH legal staff made such a huge error in advising Biden to go forward. Edit: here is the judge ruling on the plaintiffs standing: quote:Defendants dispute Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries for two reasons. First, they argue that Plaintiffs could not have suffered a procedural deprivation based on the lack of a notice-and-comment period because the HEROES Act expressly exempts the APA’s notice-and-comment requirement. ECF No. 24 at 8–9. Plaintiffs dispute this and argue that because the HEROES Act does not authorize the Program, the Program was promulgated in violation of the APA’s notice-and-comment requirement. ECF No. 26 at 6–7. Because the Court must “assume, for purposes of the standing analysis, that [Plaintiffs are] correct on the merits of [their] claim that the [Program] was promulgated in violation of the APA,” Plaintiffs have successfully alleged the deprivation of a procedural right. EEOC, 933 F.3d at 447. Like, what the hell kind of slight of hand is this? “I have to assume this fact statement is true” even though the defendant provided a fact statement that contradicts that assertion? What? Murgos fucked around with this message at 02:42 on Nov 11, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 02:23
|
|
|
Murgos posted:For summary judgement to be awarded that is supposed to mean that the case was so clear and compelling that it’s not reasonable to continue to hear more. Well, yes, but not really here. If the entire case hinges on a matter of law, then Summary Judgement is usually appropriate. Trials are for deciding disputed facts.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 02:31
|
|
|
e: nm
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 02:34
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Well, yes, but not really here. If the entire case hinges on a matter of law, then Summary Judgement is usually appropriate. Trials are for deciding disputed facts. See my edit above, there are definitely disputed facts. Edit: the judge hangs his entire opinion on that he thinks Covid is over and so the HEROS act doesn’t apply. He made this analysis on his own. Murgos fucked around with this message at 02:51 on Nov 11, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 02:43
|
|
|
The Republicans kept suing until they found another Aileen Cannon who will completely disregard actual law in favor of politics. It was always going to end up in the Supreme Court.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 02:57
|
|
|
Of all the poo poo happening today, I somehow missed the news. What a loving poo poo show. Make the PPP loans illegal too then, fucker.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 03:07
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:Of all the poo poo happening today, I somehow missed the news. What a loving poo poo show. yeah, about that https://twitter.com/kenklippenstein/status/1590488339911938048
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 03:09
|
|
|
So...how does this play out now? Can they rush it to the Supreme Court before Dec 31? I guess if not it'd make good political sense for Biden to extend the deadline again?
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 03:33
|
|
|
Good timing too as my consolidation was finally approved today 
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 03:34
|
|
|
Eason the Fifth posted:So...how does this play out now? Can they rush it to the Supreme Court before Dec 31? I guess if not it'd make good political sense for Biden to extend the deadline again? If I was Biden I would do everything I could to gently caress up the loan system now. Endless executive orders, permanent payment freezes, drop loan interest to 0, change income based repayment to .01% of discretionary income. Those are all within the purview of the DoE.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 03:38
|
|
|
SchrodingersCat posted:If I was Biden I would do everything I could to gently caress up the loan system now. Unfortunately, we are left to deal with the Joe Biden of reality rather than the Joe Biden of liberal fever dreams.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 04:09
|
|
|
Eason the Fifth posted:So...how does this play out now? Can they rush it to the Supreme Court before Dec 31? I guess if not it'd make good political sense for Biden to extend the deadline again? Well, that specific ruling can be appealed. Or, Biden could reissue the order but after providing the debate period and along with a statement on how Covid is still causing hardships and is still a national emergency to overcome this specific judges findings.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 05:06
|
|
|
Travic posted:So that's it then? Will appealing it accomplish anything? Appealing it will absolutely accomplish something. Biden's student debt forgiveness has already come to the Supreme Court twice, and both times they let it stand. They don't seem inclined to overturn it, so appealing it to them has a fair chance of being successful. And a summary judgement like this is obvious bullshit, even putting aside the ridiculous gymnastics this judge had to do to establish some sort of standing for the plaintiffs. Obviously, nothing's guaranteed, but so far the current Court doesn't seem to be against the student debt forgiveness.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 05:30
|
|
|
Very fun how nobody even bothers pointing out that the Democrats have the ability to legislate until January and could just...pass a bill that does this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 15:03
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Appealing it will absolutely accomplish something. Biden's student debt forgiveness has already come to the Supreme Court twice, and both times they let it stand. They don't seem inclined to overturn it, so appealing it to them has a fair chance of being successful. Has the Supreme Court been ok with the forgiveness or have they just said, "Not going to get involved."? Honest question because I don't know.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 17:22
|
|
|
Travic posted:Has the Supreme Court been ok with the forgiveness or have they just said, "Not going to get involved."? Honest question because I don't know. The Supreme Court has slapped it down from other courts because the standing trying to be used is that the people suing are being harmed because they don’t like their tax dollars being used on something they don’t like. Ruling this is a valid standing for harm inflicted means it gives precedent anyone can sue over taxes being used for anything and basically invalidates the entire government on all levels because anyone can claim they were harmed because taxes they paid were used towards thing and they do not like thing
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 17:27
|
|
|
Travic posted:Has the Supreme Court been ok with the forgiveness or have they just said, "Not going to get involved."? Honest question because I don't know. They've turned down the cases that have come to them - which lets the lower court's ruling stand. In both of the cases that have come to them to them so far, the challenge to debt forgiveness had been rejected by the lower courts, and so by turning the case down, the Supreme Court was allowing those rejections to stand. It only takes four justices to decide to hear the case, so that shows that even the conservative wing of the Court isn't particularly against the loan forgiveness. They wouldn't be able to do the same thing to let this ruling stand, because if the Eighth Circuit says student debt forgiveness is legal and the Fifth Circuit says it's illegal, then that's a circuit split and the Supreme Court pretty much has to get involved.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 17:35
|
|
|
TheScott2K posted:Very fun how nobody even bothers pointing out that the Democrats have the ability to legislate until January and could just...pass a bill that does this. Yeah, I was wondering why they couldn't pass it with budget reconciliation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 18:09
|
|
|
SchrodingersCat posted:Yeah, I was wondering why they couldn't pass it with budget reconciliation. President Manchin probably vetoes the gently caress out of monetary relief, at the very least, but I don't know what his argument against repayment reform to stop interest from stretching IBR payments to infinity would be.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 18:28
|
|
|
SchrodingersCat posted:Yeah, I was wondering why they couldn't pass it with budget reconciliation. I don't think it'd qualify for reconciliation unless it was paired with taxes or cuts somewhere else to make it deficit-neutral in the long run. In any case, Manchin's already gone on record calling the forgiveness plan "excessive" and insisting that debt forgiveness has to be "earned" through programs like PSLF.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 19:16
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:I don't think it'd qualify for reconciliation unless it was paired with taxes or cuts somewhere else to make it deficit-neutral in the long run. PSLF is a fun little scam, work in the public sector and make 70% of what equivalent private sector workers make while still paying 300/month on your loans for 10 years...and maybe we'll forgive the debt if a Democrat president is in the WH. Hope nothing in your life ever goes wrong or that loan never goes away.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2022 21:40
|
|
|
TheScott2K posted:Very fun how nobody even bothers pointing out that the Democrats have the ability to legislate until January and could just...pass a bill that does this. Because they can't. If it doesn't have 60 votes in senate, they don't pass any bills. Like, don't try to be a reality check and then pretend that reality doesn't exist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2022 02:30
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Because they can't. The existence of the 60 vote threshold is a choice.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2022 03:02
|
|
|
Giving you 20K isn't going to be the choice that breaks the senate deadlock on filibuster being a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2022 03:33
|
|
|
TheScott2K posted:The existence of the 60 vote threshold is a choice. Not if they don't have the votes to remove it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2022 03:35
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:They've turned down the cases that have come to them - which lets the lower court's ruling stand. In both of the cases that have come to them to them so far, the challenge to debt forgiveness had been rejected by the lower courts, and so by turning the case down, the Supreme Court was allowing those rejections to stand. It only takes four justices to decide to hear the case, so that shows that even the conservative wing of the Court isn't particularly against the loan forgiveness. I think also there is an argument someone could make against the harm in that "So if I win the lottery and want to pay it all back at once to avoid interest, I can't do that either because you would be "harmed" by not getting the interest out of my hide."
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2022 04:42
|
|
|
TheScott2K posted:The existence of the 60 vote threshold is a choice. A choice Manchin and Sinema love to make so kind of redundant.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2022 13:39
|
|
|
TheScott2K posted:Very fun how nobody even bothers pointing out that the Democrats have the ability to legislate until January and could just...pass a bill that does this. They’ve had the ability to do a lot of things for a very long time. What they lack is the will or the motivation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2022 23:58
|
|
|
lol at anyone who thought that much money would be allowed to move downward in this country. Between the forgiveness program being enacted two months before the midterms, and the "application" being like three questions long, everyone should have seen what the real game was.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2022 17:50
|
|
|
ozmunkeh posted:They’ve had the ability to do a lot of things for a very long time. What they lack is the will or the motivation. Also the votes
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2022 18:38
|
|
|
Eighth Circuit issues an injunction, says the six states in the Nebraska case have standing. The appeal will move forward and they'll hear the merits of the case. It's over, folks. Plan accordingly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2022 20:00
|
|
|
SchrodingersCat posted:Eighth Circuit issues an injunction, says the six states in the Nebraska case have standing. The appeal will move forward and they'll hear the merits of the case. Doesn't mean it is over. But, it means there will be a month or two delay (if they win) and is definitely not a great sign.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2022 20:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 14:48 |
|
|
Whether the 10-20k forgiveness happens or not, whatever. If the IDR thing coming next year trivializes or completely nullifies loan payments for 10 years and then it's gone, then that's what I'll do. God knows I don't make enough to be paying a whole lot under that plan.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2022 20:56
|
|