For The Washington Post

Illustration of a court justice's arm holding a gavel over falling pillars and the roof of the U.S. Supreme Court building surrounded by wetland grasses, graduation caps, outlines of states and a computer cursor. 

Chloe Cushman for SCOTUS2023Cases

Supreme Court

The Washington Post

US President Joe Biden Supreme Court’s decision on the Administration’s student debt relief program

supremecourtaccommodation

Affirmative Action, Student Debt Among Pending 2023 Supreme Court Cases

Postal Worker Wanted a Work Schedule That Respected the Sabbath

Staff Photographer

The Style section is often writing stories about cultural institutions in the DMV area. We are trying to build a collection of new building mugs to swap old and over-used photos out of the rotation.

staff

The Supreme Court of the United States

Supreme Court Jack Daniel's Dog Toy

Mississippi-End of Year

Andy Warhol

Supreme Court Begins New Term

Staff

Getty

Respond to prefers-color-scheme dark in app web views

Follow section front redirects in Spectrum

Enable NLP source in PCS for load testing

Switch off the News Alerts Survey Widget when we have enough responses

Poll to determine if new LUF updates are available

Allows the winning A/B test variant to be turned on without Spectrum deployment

Show infinite scrolling sections in Assembler MultiView

Show option for NLP article summaries in Action Bar

Show NLP summaries collection recirc on article pages

A general feature flag for Recipe Features that aren't yet released

Feature flag for media team features that aren't yet released

Use new Orca video player for preroll plugin in Spectrum

Show the snow tracker (instead of the heat tracker) on Spectrum

Voters key to past Democratic wins are skeptical and undermotivated

Trump’s ‘they’re out to get me’ campaign and its enablers

Biden campaign accepts invite to a vice-presidential debate 

6 Airbnb red flags to spot before you make a booking mistake

Cruise ships to return to Baltimore two months after bridge collapse 

Some cruise prices are about to get a little more clear

Who is Robert Fico? What to know about Slovakia’s leader who was shot.

Middle East conflict live updates: U.S.-built pier anchored in Gaza; ICJ hears Rafah is ‘endgame’ in Gaza destruction

Slovakia’s Fico in serious condition; suspect charged with attempted murder

Senators studied AI for a year. Critics call the result ‘pathetic.’

Cruise settles with person dragged under one of its robotaxis

Google’s AI answers could come back to bite it

Carolyn Hax: Fiancé plans to have a baby with someone else

Ask Amy: I’m scared of my adult stepson who keeps losing his temper

Ask Sahaj: I live with my parents and generational trauma ‘runs the house’

Look to the cloud to protect the life documents saved on your computer

Can you spot bad financial advice on TikTok? Take our quiz.

5 myths about Social Security as the program faces a funding crisis

The Post’s choices in Northern Virginia’s U.S. House primaries

States see legalized sports betting as a tax windfall — but at what cost?

Haiti’s plight is a case study in the ‘responsibility to protect’

The 34 best things to do in D.C. this weekend and next week

Rating every game on the Commanders’ 2024 schedule

8 best things to do with kids in the D.C. area this weekend 

Best Places to Work in the Federal Government 2023

A hō’ike in Virginia celebrates Hawaiian life

Think you can build a gold-medal U.S. gymnastics team? Try it.

Puppy abandoned with heart-rending note is adopted, named Minerva

Man, 91, shocks tiny firehouse with $500K gift: ‘Nobody knew how much I’d saved’

Retired cop meets abandoned baby he helped 23 years ago: ‘What are the odds?’

Netflix will air NFL’s Christmas games, a major step for streaming service

Sam Feist, longtime CNN executive, will become CEO of C-SPAN

Michael Cohen testimony ties Donald Trump to hush money payment

President Joe Biden Joint Chiefs and Combatant Commanders 

See more coverage in your recommendations

Get the weekly Campaign Moment newsletter

Set alerts for major election developments

Election 2024

The Campaign Moment newsletter

Politics alerts

Tom Brenner

<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/candidates/joe-biden-2024/" target="_blank" class="contextual_link">President Biden</a> does not have authority to implement his roughly $400 billion program to forgive student loan debt, the Supreme Court ruled Friday, issuing another blow to the administration’s bold claims of power in the final decision of the court’s term.

By afternoon, Biden announced a “new path” for loan forgiveness and started a federal rulemaking process, which could take months. He also announced plans for a temporary, 12-month “ramp” repayment program for student loan borrowers. Under this program, the Education Department will not refer borrowers who miss loan payments to credit agencies for 12 months, Biden said, “to give them a chance to get back up and running.”

“I’m never going to stop fighting for you,” Biden said in remarks at the White House. “We’ll use every tool at our disposal to get you the student debt relief you need and reach your dreams. It’s good for the economy, it’s good for the country.”

The quick response highlighted the political stakes of the issue — and was probably a sign that the White House had worried the Supreme Court would not sanction the far-reaching program.

The challenge brought together controversial issues: an ambitious program aimed at fulfilling a campaign promise for Biden’s political base; heightened suspicion by the court’s conservative supermajority of the ability of federal agencies to act without specific congressional authorization; and the power of Republican-led states to use the judiciary to stop a president’s priorities before they take effect.

Biden’s program would have affected up to 40 million borrowers, about half of whom were eligible to have their loan balances erased. While loan repayments have been paused because of the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/coronavirus/" target="_blank" class="contextual_link">coronavirus</a> pandemic, they are set to resume this fall. The vote to strike the program down was 6-3 along ideological lines, with conservative<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-506_nmip.pdf" target=_blank> Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. writing</a> for the majority.

We’re tracking <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/05/11/supreme-court-decisions/" target=_blank>how the Supreme Court justices ruled on the major cases of 2023</a>.

Biden contended that his administration had the authority to forgive student loan debt under the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act of 2003. That law allows the education secretary to waive or modify loan provisions in response to a national emergency, such as the pandemic.

But the majority said Education Secretary Miguel Cardona’s plan rested on an “exhaustive rewriting” of the statute.

“The Secretary asserts that the HEROES Act grants him the authority to cancel $430 billion of student loan principal. It does not,” Roberts wrote. “We hold today that the Act allows the Secretary to ‘waive or modify’ existing statutory or regulatory provisions applicable to financial assistance programs under the Education Act, not to rewrite that statute from the ground up.”

Roberts was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr., Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.

Biden and Cardona had proposed a plan that would eliminate up to $10,000 of student debt for borrowers earning up to $125,000 annually, or up to $250,000 for married couples. Those who received Pell Grants, a form of financial aid for low- and middle-income students, would be eligible for an additional $10,000 in forgiveness.

What's next for student loan forgiveness after Supreme Court ruling

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/02/28/supreme-court-student-loan-forgiveness-hearing/" target=_blank>who defended the program at oral arguments</a>, said Cardona’s actions were not only justified by the law, they were also exactly what Congress had in mind when it passed the Heroes Act in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

In a dissent from the majority opinion, Justice Elena Kagan said the court was making national policy in place of Congress and the executive branch.

“Congress authorized the forgiveness plan (among many other actions); the Secretary put it in place; and the President would have been accountable for its success or failure,” Kagan wrote, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson. “But this Court today decides that some 40 million Americans will not receive the benefits the plan provides, because (so says the Court) that assistance is too ‘significan[t].’ ”

Biden said the court was wrongly eliminating “the lifeline tens of millions of hardworking Americans needed as they try to recover from a once-in-a-century pandemic.”

Read the full text of the Supreme Court’s student loan forgiveness decision

“The hypocrisy of Republican elected officials is stunning,” the president said in a statement. “They had no problem with billions in pandemic-related loans to businesses — including hundreds of thousands and in some cases millions of dollars for their own businesses. And those loans were forgiven.”

The justices have rejected the administration’s expansive arguments in the past. The court lifted a pandemic-era moratorium on rental evictions put in place by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-biden-vaccine-rules/2022/01/13/2e6e4b9e-749e-11ec-bc13-18891499c514_story.html?itid=lk_inline_manual_18" target=_blank>threw out a coronavirus vaccination-or-testing mandate</a> imposed on large businesses by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. And in a ruling unrelated to the pandemic, it cited the “major questions” doctrine to<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/30/supreme-court-epa-climate-change/?itid=lk_inline_manual_18" target=_blank> limit the Environmental Protection Agency’s options</a> for combating climate change.

The challenge to the student loan program was brought by six Republican-led states in one case, and two individuals from Texas in another. In both cases, the Justice Department questioned whether the plaintiffs had legal standing to file their suits. The court dismissed the challenge from Texas but said Missouri had standing to bring the case because of a state-created organization that deals with student loans.

Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers (R), who represents one of the challenger states, said in a statement that the justices had “stopped the Biden Administration’s breathtaking attempt to grab power.” Hilgers called the ruling a “timely reminder that the President is no king. He must work with, and not around, Congress.”

Kagan said her conservative colleagues strained to find a way to vote against Biden’s plan.

“In adjudicating Missouri’s claim, the majority reaches out to decide a matter it has no business deciding,” she wrote. “It blows through a constitutional guardrail intended to keep courts acting like courts.”

Roberts seemed sensitive to the criticism and quick to rebut it.

“It has become a disturbing feature of some recent opinions to criticize the decisions with which they disagree as going beyond the proper role of the judiciary,” he wrote. “We do not mistake this plainly heartfelt disagreement for disparagement. It is important that the public not be misled either. Any such misperception would be harmful to this institution and our country.”

Roberts said the majority “employed the traditional tools of judicial decisionmaking” in finding that the administration was exploiting vague language in the Heroes Act to move forward with a plan Congress probably would not authorize.

“From a few narrowly delineated situations specified by Congress, the Secretary has expanded forgiveness to nearly every borrower in the country,” Roberts wrote. “The Secretary’s plan has ‘modified’ the cited provisions only in the same sense that ‘the French Revolution “modified” the status of the French nobility’ — it has abolished them and supplanted them with a new regime entirely.”

Roberts was paraphrasing a line from an unrelated Supreme Court opinion by the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

Indeed, Biden and other Democratic officials once questioned whether the law provided such leeway. Roberts quoted former House speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to that effect.

And Biden’s debt relief program has been a divisive issue on Capitol Hill. On June 7, the president <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/06/07/student-loan-forgiveness-biden-veto/" target=_blank>vetoed a Republican-led resolution</a> to strike down the program and restart loan payments for tens of millions of borrowers. The measure had passed the Senate with the backing of Sens. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), illustrating the likely difficulty of getting any future debt relief plan through Congress.

The<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/06/30/supreme-court-decision-student-loan-forgiveness/" target=_blank> Supreme Court rejected President Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan</a> in the latest blow to the ambitious program.

After more than three years, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/06/02/student-loan-payment-pause-nears-ending/" target=_blank>the student loan payment pause</a> will end, and payments will resume in October.

In 2022, the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2022/09/29/republicans-student-loan-forgiveness-lawsuit/" target=_blank>debt-relief plan drew legal challenges</a> after it was unveiled, and it had been <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/11/14/appeals-halts-student-loan-forgiveness/" target=_blank>on hold since last November</a>.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) welcomed the court’s decision Friday. “The American people know that the Biden Administration’s student loan socialism plan would be a raw deal for hardworking taxpayers,” he said. “Now that the Supreme Court has rejected the Administration’s position in Biden v. Nebraska, they can know that it’s illegal.”

The administration’s best hope at the Supreme Court was to convince the justices that none of the challengers had really been injured by the program and thus did not have legal standing to sue. Challengers must show they have suffered a specific, rather than generalized, injury that could be remedied by relief from a federal court. It was not enough just to object to the size of the program or even to allege that the president had exceeded his authority.

A panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit had found that the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority, a quasi-independent entity, could suffer losses from Biden’s program that would hurt Missouri, one of the challenger states. A different court said the two borrowers, Myra Brown and Alexander Taylor, had standing to proceed because Taylor didn’t qualify for $20,000 of forgiveness, while Brown was ineligible altogether.

The court <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-535_i3kn.pdf" target=_blank>unanimously dismissed</a> the suit from the individuals, saying they did not have standing.

But Roberts said Missouri’s challenge could proceed. “The Secretary’s plan harms MOHELA in the performance of its public function and so directly harms the State that created and controls MOHELA,” he wrote. “Missouri thus has suffered an injury in fact sufficient to give it standing to challenge the Secretary’s plan.”

Kagan said the majority was overextending itself to find legal standing. “Is there a person in America who thinks Missouri is here because it is worried about MOHELA’s loss of loan-servicing fees? I would like to meet him,” she wrote. Instead, she argued, Missouri and the other states were at the court because they thought Biden had implemented a bad policy.

“But that question is not what this Court sits to decide,” she added.

On the merits, Kagan and her fellow dissenters said both Biden and President <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/donald-trump/" target="_blank" class="contextual_link">Donald Trump</a> used the broad wording of the law to shape moratoriums on loan repayment. “The HEROES Act was designed to deal with national emergencies — typically major in scope, often unpredictable in nature,” she wrote.

She noted that the majority was objecting to the program’s size and voicing concerns about administrative power. “Thus the Court once again substitutes itself for Congress and the Executive Branch — and the hundreds of millions of people they represent — in making this Nation’s most important, as well as most contested, policy decisions,” Kagan wrote.

The legal battles have left millions of student loan borrowers in limbo. More than half of eligible people had applied for the forgiveness program before it was halted by the courts, with the Education Department approving some 16 million applications.

The department shut down the application process before Sinyetta Hill, 22, was able to apply, but the newly minted University of Wisconsin graduate had remained hopeful that the court would uphold Biden’s program.

As a Pell Grant recipient, she would have been eligible to have all $20,000 of her student loan debt forgiven. She will have to start repaying that balance this fall, just as she prepares to apply to law school and take on even more debt.

“It’s devastating because I had so much optimism that this decision would go through,” said Hill, who earned a bachelor’s in political science and philosophy this spring. “Now students like me are still stuck in a rut.”

The debt relief decision came a day after the court struck down affirmative action admissions policies as unconstitutional, and student advocates said both rulings will erode equity advances for Black students. The restrictions on affirmative action could make it more difficult for Black students to attend competitive colleges, many of which offer substantial financial aid to reduce the need to borrow. Striking down the debt cancellation plan, meanwhile, will deny Black borrowers, who hold a disproportionate share of student loan debt, a chance to alleviate the burden.

“Within the last 24 hours, the Supreme Court has severely limited access to prosperity for Black, Brown and other minorities,” said Chavis Jones, associate counsel with the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. “We must ensure [these] students have equal access to institutions of higher education … and access to economic prosperity once they leave those institutions.”

The cases are Biden v. Nebraska and U.S. Department of Education v. Brown.

University of Florida

Robert Barnes has been a Washington Post reporter and editor since 1987. He joined The Post to cover Maryland politics, and he has served in various editing positions, including metropolitan editor and national political editor. He has covered the Supreme Court since November 2006.

Robert Barnes

Columbia University, New York University

Danielle Douglas-Gabriel covers the economics of higher education, writing about the financial policies that determine a student's access to education and ability to complete a credential. 

Danielle Douglas-Gabriel

Supreme Court conservatives block Biden's student loan forgiveness plan

the-washington-post

For the Washington Post 

Biden administration

The Fix

The 202s

Polling

Democracy in America

Balance of Power Pair

U.S. House Aggregate

U.S. Senate Aggregate

Politics

washpost

prism://prism.query/site,/politics/courts-law&limit=20

Courts & Law

Latest news and coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court

prism://prism.query/site-articles-only,/politics&limit=20

Cut through the 2024 election noise. Get The Campaign Moment newsletter.

Post Politics from The Washington Post is the source for political news headlines, in-depth politics coverage and political opinion, plus breaking news on the biden administration and White House, Congress, the Supreme Court, elections and more.