Rule of Law

RELEASE: In Striking Down the Biden Administration Student Debt Relief Plan, the Supreme Court’s Conservative Supermajority Substitutes Its Policy Judgment for that of Congress

WASHINGTON, DC – Following the Supreme Court’s announcement of its decision in Biden v. Nebraska, one of two challenges to the Biden administration student debt relief plan, Constitutional Accountability Center Appellate Counsel Smita Ghosh issued the following reaction:

In an opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Court held that the Biden administration lacked the authority to relieve the student debt burdens of borrowers affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Although the Court claimed to rely on the text of the HEROES Act, a law giving the Education Department the power to waive student loan rules in the face of national emergencies, the purportedly textualist Court ignored the breadth of the language Congress used in the HEROES Act, which makes clear that education officials can take broad actions relating to student loans in the face of unforeseen circumstances. Former Representative George Miller, one of the chief architects of the law, made this point in a brief filed by the Constitutional Accountability Center. The Court’s majority also focused on the unprecedented nature of the debt relief plan—an approach that disregards the unprecedented nature of the pandemic itself.

Justice Kagan dissented, echoing many of the points in Representative Miller’s brief. In Justice Kagan’s words, the Act was designed to deal with situations that are “often unpredictable in nature,” and gives experts at the Education Department the broad authority to determine how to protect student borrowers in national emergencies.

As Justice Kagan further explained, the Court departed from its traditional role in this case, making itself—rather than Congress—the decisionmaker on federal student-loan policy. The consequences of that choice are profound—both for student borrowers and for the rule of law.

##

Resources:

Case page in Biden v. Nebraska and Department of Education v. Brown: https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/biden-v-nebraska/

George Miller, Can Biden legally cancel student debt? There’s no question, Feb. 22, 2023: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/02/22/student-debt-cancellation-congress-heroes-act/

##

Constitutional Accountability Center is a nonpartisan think tank and public interest law firm dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text, history, and values. Visit CAC’s website at www.theusconstitution.org.

###

More from Rule of Law

Rule of Law
May 16, 2025

CAC Release: At the D.C. Circuit, Everyone Agrees that the Constitution Does Not Permit the President to Unilaterally Shutter the CFPB

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District...
Rule of Law
May 16, 2025

CAC Release: Skepticism About Trump Administration’s Power Grab at Labor Rights Agencies at D.C. Circuit Argument This Morning

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District...
Rule of Law
U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland

J. Doe 4 v. Musk

In J. Doe 4 v. Musk, the United States District Court for the District of Maryland is considering whether Elon Musk’s role in DOGE violates the Appointments Clause and the Constitution’s separation of powers.
Rule of Law
May 9, 2025

Dodd-Frank Authors Join Warren, Waters to Challenge CFPB Firings

Bloomberg Law
Top Democrats, Dodd-Frank namesakes cite separation of powers Amicus brief highlights CFPB’s 2008 financial crisis...
Rule of Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

National Treasury Employees Union v. Vought

In National Treasury Employees Union v. Vought, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is considering whether the Trump administration’s efforts to unilaterally shut down the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau are...
Rule of Law
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO v. Trump

In American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO v. Trump, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California is considering whether the Trump administration’s efforts to unilaterally reorganize the federal government are constitutional...