The Save plan – a means-tested program – was blocked from further implementation by Republican-appointed judges

The Save plan – a means-tested program – was blocked from further implementation by Republican-appointed judges

A federal appeals court has sided with Republican-controlled states to deliver another setback to Joe Biden’s student loan relief plan designed to reduce monthly payments for millions of lower-income graduates and speed up debt forgiveness for some borrowers.

A unanimous, unsigned ruling issued on Friday by three Republican-appointed judges in Missouri blocked further implementation of the Saving on a Valuable Education (Save) plan – the Department of Education’s means-tested debt relief program that is being challenged by seven Republican-led states.

  • TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee
    65·
    3 months ago

    I smell an ad brewing.

    In 2017 the Republican led House and Senate passed and Trump signed into law legislation to give $1.7 trillion in tax breaks to the billionaire class that you and your children will have to pay for. Today, debt relief for hard-working families was blocked by those same Republicans. Don’t you think it’s time they got fired? Harris/Walz. On the side of the working class.

    • DigitalNirvana@lemm.ee
      17·
      3 months ago

      Dems cannot let this go without a challenge. The GOP is giving the openings for their undoing, and the dems need to use them fiercely.

    • catloaf@lemm.eeEnglish
      5·
      3 months ago

      Republican messaging is that it’s a government handout, to the liberal elite, the leftist woke mob, and we paid our fair share to go to college, so they should too! You took the loans, you pay them back!

      Or at least that’s what I see whenever I feel masochistic enough to look at the comments on broader social media. Those are the points that need to be countered.

    • n2burns@lemmy.ca
      9·
      3 months ago

      If I remember correctly, it’s the fact that these loans are held by companies who pay state tax. If the loans are paid out by the federal government, the states’ future tax revenues will be diminished.

    • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
      57·
      3 months ago

      It causes the state of Missouri to lose 44 million a year in fees collected. That’s why they were the only state to have standing.

      • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
        2·
        3 months ago

        If hypothetical future revenue is ground for states to sue the federal government, you might as well dissolve the federation.

        • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
          22·
          3 months ago

          It’s not hypothetical. They are collecting you money now. It’d be a loss of revenue Only 1 state was impacted and that’s is what moved it forward. Had Missouri not been part of the lawsuit, the case would have been kicked for standing.

          • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
            2·
            3 months ago

            When congress introduces regulations or taxes it can also reduce revenue that states have right now. And let’s not get started on international politics.

            • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
              21·
              3 months ago

              I was just answering the question as asked. I find standing bizarre in many of these situations. They rarely make sense to me but I’m not a lawyer. Luckily my lawyer friends find them baffling as well