Excellent analysis, and I agree that the stopping such a wholesale appropriation of what should be congress' authority will outweigh any do-gooder urge among the conservative votes who might be tempted to waffle. Failure of the court to stop this would engender all sorts of follow-on complications and I think to whatever degree the conservative justices take originalism to heart in this case it will be enoughThe Supreme Court will hear the case:
Supreme Court Leaves Biden Student-Loan ‘Forgiveness’ on Hold, Agrees to Hear Case | National Review
Oral arguments in the case will begin in February.www.nationalreview.com
The Northern District of Texas's opinion for the stay (26 pages):
Loose predictions in absence of arguments:
That leaves ACB, Roberts, and Alito to really sway the court. From the most recent term, page 15 of the SCOTUSblog statpack, ACB and Alito are I think most likely to be aligned with Thomas & Kavanaugh, and I'd call Alito to be pretty secure on this. Roberts is kind of the wild card here because he doesn't like to make waves as chief justice, but I think he and Kavanaugh will make the case that while we have executive powers, they should not be expanded so drastically. The structural stability argument favors rejecting such absurd spending. The political stability argument is basically "the media will be mean to The Court."
- The three progressives will all vote in favor because it's "helping" people and we have a century of runaway Administrative state, so what's a little more.
- Thomas is a pretty secure vote. It's not in the constitution, it's not in the founding, it's not legal.
- Given their misgivings with the administrative state, I'd wager that Gorsuch & Kavanaugh will be with Thomas. Particularly that this is about spending and not rights/access, which I expect should mellow out Gorsuch's wildcard reputation on this.
So, it could be 5-4 in favor of the executive authority, but I think that's not so likely. Most likely is 5-4 against the administration or perhaps even 6-3 and we'll have another year of listening to accusations that the judiciary is being political when they rule to, you know, follow the constitution.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Student loan 'Forgiveness",Too little to help anyone, just enough to make everyone angry
- Thread starter edwea
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
At the end of the day, this student load mess ends up with federal subsidization of colleges. They will raise prices constantly, getting richer every day from the federal money and churn out graduates who's only value will be to continue voting in new benefits for the colleges.
Sounds about right. Didn't ACB turn down some challenge or injunction request relating to this, though?The Supreme Court will hear the case:
Supreme Court Leaves Biden Student-Loan ‘Forgiveness’ on Hold, Agrees to Hear Case | National Review
Oral arguments in the case will begin in February.
The Northern District of Texas's opinion for the stay (26 pages):
Loose predictions in absence of arguments:
That leaves ACB, Roberts, and Alito to really sway the court. From the most recent term, page 15 of the SCOTUSblog statpack, ACB and Alito are I think most likely to be aligned with Thomas & Kavanaugh, and I'd call Alito to be pretty secure on this. Roberts is kind of the wild card here because he doesn't like to make waves as chief justice, but I think he and Kavanaugh will make the case that while we have executive powers, they should not be expanded so drastically. The structural stability argument favors rejecting such absurd spending. The political stability argument is basically "the media will be mean to The Court."
- The three progressives will all vote in favor because it's "helping" people and we have a century of runaway Administrative state, so what's a little more.
- Thomas is a pretty secure vote. It's not in the constitution, it's not in the founding, it's not legal.
- Given their misgivings with the administrative state, I'd wager that Gorsuch & Kavanaugh will be with Thomas. Particularly that this is about spending and not rights/access, which I expect should mellow out Gorsuch's wildcard reputation on this.
So, it could be 5-4 in favor of the executive authority, but I think that's not so likely. Most likely is 5-4 against the administration or perhaps even 6-3 and we'll have another year of listening to accusations that the judiciary is being political when they rule to, you know, follow the constitution.
Libs gonna lib, they're all safe yeses. But I still have a hard time believing the others will sign off on a trillion dollar EO.
JEBland
INGO's least subtle Alphabet agency taskforce spy
Yes, but I don't think that it's a clear signal of how she'd vote.
ACB cares a lot about process, arguments, and facts (see, for instance, her tense exchange during her confirmation hearing regarding denying a racial discrimination claim in firing case. IIRC, a racial slur was used after the firing, and the party raising the claim didn't provide facts for racial discrimination before the firing or even claim that it occurred prior to the firing. I can't give a YouTube link as I'm on the phone). In the instance against the Biden EO, the district court rejected the arguments. In the case that is going to the court, the lower Federal court felt that the facts and arguments merited stopping the governmental action, which puts it on a stronger footing to go to SCOTUS.
Nationwide injunctions are a weird thing. I just hope that the arguments are solid for the 6 people who may vote to prevent it, and I suspect ACB and Roberts are the biggest factors. I don't think the 3 pseudo-progressives will vote against the administration irrespective of the arguments in this case. That said, I think I'd revise my earlier prediction to 6-3, 5-4, 4-5 in order of likelihood of Against the EO - For the EO.
Irresponsible empathy is destroying this country.
Ends up with? It's already been there, for at least 20 years.
JEBland
INGO's least subtle Alphabet agency taskforce spy
A second challenge to this is allowed to go to SCOTUS. Their basic claim is that the plan isn't expansive enough and if the notice-and-comment period were properly attended to, then they wouldn't be injured by the EO.
https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/12/court-adds-second-challenge-to-bidens-student-loan-relief-plan/
newrepublic.com
https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/12/court-adds-second-challenge-to-bidens-student-loan-relief-plan/
Dubious Challenges to Biden’s Student Debt Order Keep Piling Up at the Supreme Court
It’s by no means clear that the high court will ultimately spike the administration’s loan forgiveness plan, but it will have a range of opportunities.
newrepublic.com
Love the headline “dubious challenges“…A second challenge to this is allowed to go to SCOTUS. Their basic claim is that the plan isn't expansive enough and if the notice-and-comment period were properly attended to, then they wouldn't be injured by the EO.
https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/12/court-adds-second-challenge-to-bidens-student-loan-relief-plan/
Dubious Challenges to Biden’s Student Debt Order Keep Piling Up at the Supreme Court
It’s by no means clear that the high court will ultimately spike the administration’s loan forgiveness plan, but it will have a range of opportunities.
JEBland
INGO's least subtle Alphabet agency taskforce spy
I was just glad that it's obvious enough that I don't need to give a disclaimer about the slant of the article/source.
The author at the New Republic basically states that they believe the claim by Brown is made disingenuously.
JEBland
INGO's least subtle Alphabet agency taskforce spy
How ending the COVID emergency will complicate the fight over student-loan forgiveness - SCOTUSblog
The White House said last week that it will stop classifying COVID-19 as a national emergency on May 11. Allowing the emergency declarations to expire will unravel an array of federal policies on issues like free at-home tests, temporary Medicaid coverage, and even immigration. But there is one pol
I doubt that the newest judge will vote in line with the logic of rejecting the Covid border case, but would take much more interest in her rulings if she does.
JEBland
INGO's least subtle Alphabet agency taskforce spy
This popped up in an email from AEI today:
www.aei.org
The student loan forgiveness tracker mentioned in the article:
www.aei.org
Biden is Already Spending Toward $1 Trillion in Student Loan Handouts
When the founding fathers gave Congress the power of the purse, they never anticipated the presidency could preside over a $1.6 trillion loan portfolio drawn directly from the U.S. Treasury. Nonetheless, the federal student loan portfolio places President Joe Biden in that exact position, and if...
www.aei.org
The student loan forgiveness tracker mentioned in the article:
Introducing AEI’s Student Loan Forgiveness Tracker
AEI’s new Student Debt Forgiveness Tracker aims to capture foregone federal student loan revenues that have already happened as well those to come.
www.aei.org
Fiscal responsibility doesn't mean zero debt. Especially if the debt is transitory. Having a fiscal policy that does not treat debt as transitory is a problem. Having deficit spending just keeps accruing more debt. And the ********ers that keep saying that debt doesn't matter, and deficits don't matter, are full of ****. They used to say back in the Reagan years and beyond, hey, it's not a big deal if the debt is x% of GDP.
And that's nonsense because permanent deficit spending means the debt keeps increasing. The debt-is-good ********ers don't even bother excusing it with GDP anymore, because the debt is now higher than GDP by a good bit. GDP, ~$23T. Debt, $31T. Now, rather than burying concern with economic jargon, they just say you're a bigot for mentioning it.
Continued deficit spending is not sustainable. But if you have manageable transitory debt there's not much impact other than the interest payments, and maybe some inflation. And that was the impact with Reagan. Less tangible impact was Reagan's spending, and especially his justification of it, was that his administration was the first to project a "meh" attitude openly. It marked the start of a sharp increase in deficit spending and the debt has risen steadily.
ETA: I really meant to post this in the debt thread. But I guess it applies here too.
And that's nonsense because permanent deficit spending means the debt keeps increasing. The debt-is-good ********ers don't even bother excusing it with GDP anymore, because the debt is now higher than GDP by a good bit. GDP, ~$23T. Debt, $31T. Now, rather than burying concern with economic jargon, they just say you're a bigot for mentioning it.
Continued deficit spending is not sustainable. But if you have manageable transitory debt there's not much impact other than the interest payments, and maybe some inflation. And that was the impact with Reagan. Less tangible impact was Reagan's spending, and especially his justification of it, was that his administration was the first to project a "meh" attitude openly. It marked the start of a sharp increase in deficit spending and the debt has risen steadily.
ETA: I really meant to post this in the debt thread. But I guess it applies here too.
Last edited:
Hey, when your deficit is already $1.4T, what's another couple hundred $B, right?
And. If $1.4T deficit is good. $2.8T is twice as good, right? **** it. Let's just print that money. **** inflation. Just print more. Fly a big C17 filled with a trillion dollars over Ukraine and do a big humanitarian dump.
What? No? You bigot!
twice as gooder you dumb hillbilly. learn american damnit.Hey, when your deficit is already $1.4T, what's another couple hundred $B, right?
And. If $1.4T deficit is good. $2.8T is twice as good, right? **** it. Let's just print that money. **** inflation. Just print more. Fly a big C17 filled with a trillion dollars over Ukraine and do a big humanitarian dump.
What? No? You bigot!
Government debt can be solved with 1 new federal law. Make it legal for personal finances to use the same mechanisms used by the government to defer payments on existing debt and the ability to acquire new sources of lending. Now if the government wants to eliminate their use of those same mechanisms to keep our capitalist business model afloat, so be it. If they can use it, so should we…
Biden will be playing defense on student loans this week at the Supreme Court. Here's why.
Biden's proposal, which would forgive up to $20,000 for some borrowers, is likely to face sharp questioning from the Supreme Court's conservatives.
www.usatoday.com
Supreme Court likely to strike down Biden's plan for student-loan forgiveness, analysts say
As the Supreme Court prepares to rule on President Biden's plan to cancel a big tranche of student loans, analysts say it's likely the court will nix it.
www.marketwatch.com
The Unhinged Meltdowns Outside SCOTUS Over Student Debt Are Something to See
SCOTUS is going to make these liberals so unhappy.
redstate.com
Couldn't read the "MarketWatch" article, but I'm pleased and surprised that the USA Today article actual had a tiny bit of analysis beyond: Left for it, Right against it.View attachment 258924
Biden will be playing defense on student loans this week at the Supreme Court. Here's why.
Biden's proposal, which would forgive up to $20,000 for some borrowers, is likely to face sharp questioning from the Supreme Court's conservatives.www.usatoday.com
Supreme Court likely to strike down Biden's plan for student-loan forgiveness, analysts say
As the Supreme Court prepares to rule on President Biden's plan to cancel a big tranche of student loans, analysts say it's likely the court will nix it.
It said "The Supreme Court's majority has relied on what's known as the "major questions doctrine" to strike down significant regulations that are are not explicitly authorized in the law."
The way I learned it was: Congress only has the powers stated ("enumerated") in the Constitution. Congress can only delegate to administrative agencies, the powers it has. Administrative agencies can only exercise the power specifically delegated to them by Congress. "Go regulate education" is not a valid delegation of anything; the delegation has to be specific and within within Congress' enumerated powers.
Now, we may disagree with Congress delegating its powers at all, but at this point, that's a philosophical argument. I would be pretty satisfied if they stuck to the steps above.
Unsurprising outcome. Consumer spending gonna take a massive hit in August. People got used to not paying in 2020, got clobbered by inflation and rent hikes last year, and are now getting a several hundred dollar monthly payment turned back on. People have been asking when the American consumer finally breaks and recession comes, will this be it?
Last edited:
Site Supporter
Staff online
-
texkevAdministrator
Members online
- HoosierLife
- Plumbous
- bloodandgutsmurphy
- Michigan Slim
- Noble Sniper
- thirdmetal4
- ramick
- indyblue
- edporch
- sadclownwp
- Bosshoss
- tommy-t
- agreen0170
- mmpsteve
- bub74
- Reece'sPieces
- Billythekid
- Belleduke
- Ingomike
- Amishman44
- mbkintner
- Glock Fan
- Rburney
- Popeye Thee Sailor
- jedi
- IN New Guy
- Colt556
- PMoran
- tca1352
- BR8818
- Pin
- Shay
- ranger391xt
- J D
- Redacted
- texkev
- gcoop
- hunt4fun
- jsx1043
- FreeLand
- Gabriel
- Indianapail
- Bigdog357
- Bookmark
- snowwalker
- DDadams
- indiucky
- Elmoh01
- Kaden1
- darkkevin
