The new plan was part of a piecemeal approach to student debt after the justices rejected a proposal last year that would have canceled more than $400 billion in loans.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday maintained a temporary pause on a new effort by President Biden to wipe out tens and perhaps hundreds of billions of dollars of student debt.

The plan was part of the president’s piecemeal approach to forgiving debt after the Supreme Court rejected a more ambitious proposal last year that would have canceled more than $400 billion in loans. Mr. Biden has instead pursued more limited measures directed at certain types of borrowers, including people on disability and public service workers, and refined existing programs.

The decision leaves in limbo millions of borrowers enrolled in a new plan, called Saving on a Valuable Education, which ties monthly payments to household size and earnings.

The emergency application was one of two related to the program that the justices decided on Wednesday. The brief order did not give reasons, which is typical, and no public dissents were noted.

Republican-led states had filed a number of challenges to the plan, including a lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, in St. Louis, which earlier this summer issued a broad hold on the loan plan while it considers the merits of the case.

  • Jesus@lemmy.world
    401·
    21 days ago

    We need to flip the house and pass the senate’s bill to expand the court. Screw these extremists.

    • Chef@sh.itjust.works
      19·
      21 days ago

      13 federal circuits.

      There should be 13 Supreme Court justices.

      Each justice could be responsible as “executive” of their circuit.

      12 associate justices for the 1st through 12th circuit.

      The chief justice is assigned the Federal Appeals Circuit.

      It makes way too much sense.

        • scarabine@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
          29·
          21 days ago

          “Your desire to push out the thugs grinding our government’s ability to grow and change to a halt is an extremest view” sure is a weirdo take, isn’t it?

        • LEwC23@sh.itjust.works
          120·
          21 days ago

          And in four years just expand the court. And in four years just expand the court. What is your end game

          • kescusay@lemmy.worldEnglish
            16·
            21 days ago

            I reiterate: It’s kind of weird to think using the legislative process as the founders did is extreme. Why do I say that? Because the founders organized the Supreme Court via legislation.

            If in four years a Republican-controlled House, Senate, and Executive branch want to expand the court via legislation, then that’s their prerogative. And if four years after that, a Democrat-controlled House, Senate, and Executive branch want to do it again, that’s fine.

            There’s nothing magical or mystical about nine members. Other developed countries have much larger Supreme Courts, which dilutes the ability of any one administration to shape it.

      • Chef@sh.itjust.works
        17·
        21 days ago

        You can’t change the number of justices on the Supreme Court.

        Except that you can.

        And they did. Eight times.

        1789 - six justices

        1801 - reduced to five justices

        1802 - restored to six justices

        1807 - seven justices

        1836 - nine justices

        1863 - ten justices

        1866 - nine justices

        1867 - eight justices

        1869 - nine justices