The finances of many Americans are in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court as it hears arguments Tuesday in appeals by President Joe Biden's administration of lower court rulings blocking his plan to cancel $430 billion in student debt.
WASHINGTON — Shanna Hayes in 2007 became the first member of her immediate family to attend college. She did not realize she was setting off on a path toward another, less-welcome family first — racking up more than $150,000 in student debt.
Legal experts said Biden's program, intended to ease the financial burden on debt-saddled, college-educated Americans like Hayes but criticized by Republicans as an overreach of his authority, may be scrutinized by the court under the so-called major questions doctrine. Its 6-3 conservative majority has employed this muscular judicial approach to invalidate major Biden policies deemed lacking clear congressional authorization.
The conservative justices already have shown skepticism toward giving deference to federal agency decisions. Both administrations relied upon a 2003 federal law called the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act, or HEROES Act, that allows student loan debt relief during wartime or national emergencies.
In the case brought by individual borrowers, Texas-based U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman, a Trump appointee, in November found the plan violated the major questions doctrine — a ruling that the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined to put on hold pending appeal.The major questions doctrine gives judges broad discretion to invalidate executive agency actions unless Congress clearly authorized them in legislation.
Brasil Últimas Notícias, Brasil Manchetes
Similar News:Você também pode ler notícias semelhantes a esta que coletamos de outras fontes de notícias.
Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Landmark Big Tech Section 230 CaseThe Supreme Court heard arguments today in the first case challenging critical protections for tech companies under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to be argued before the high court.
Consulte Mais informação »
U.S. Supreme Court hears case against Twitter over Istanbul massacreThe U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday began hearing for a second straight day a bid to hold internet companies accountable for contentious content posted by users, this time involving a lawsuit against Twitter Inc by the American relatives of a Jordanian man killed in a Istanbul nightclub massacre.
Consulte Mais informação »
Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Whether Twitter Is Liable in Terror CaseThe case is, which was brought by family members of a man killed in an Islamic State attack, is the second in a pair of arguments this week testing the liability of internet providers for user posts.
Consulte Mais informação »
Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Twitter Terrorism CaseThe Supreme Court heard arguments today in Twitter v. Taamneh, a case seeking to hold Twitter responsible for aiding and abetting terrorism because terrorists have been able to use the platform.
Consulte Mais informação »
Supreme Court wrestles with lawsuit shield for social mediaIn its first case about the federal law that is credited with helping create the modern internet, the Supreme Court seems unlikely to side with a family wanting to hold Google liable for the death of their daughter who was killed in a terrorist attack
Consulte Mais informação »
Liberal judge advances in race for Wisconsin’s Supreme CourtMilwaukee County Circuit Judge Janet Protasiewicz advanced in Tuesday’s pivotal Wisconsin Supreme Court primary, securing one of two spots for the April general election that will determine majority control.
Consulte Mais informação »