U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-05-2022, 08:44 PM
 
3,020 posts, read 1,100,667 times
Reputation: 6014

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by redguard57 View Post
Suit could be brought by pretty much anybody with the money.
I'm not a constitutional scholar, as I've said, but I do not believe the above is correct.

The very first question a federal court tackles for any lawsuit is "does the plaintiff have STANDING?" Here's what the DOJ has to say about standing:

https://www.justice.gov/jm/civil-res...5-standing-sue

Quote:
The "case or controversy" clause of Article III of the Constitution imposes a minimal constitutional standing requirement on all litigants attempting to bring suit in federal court. In order to invoke the court's jurisdiction, the plaintiff must demonstrate, at an "irreducible minimum," that:
  1. he/she has suffered a distinct and palpable injury as a result of the putatively illegal conduct of the defendant;
  2. the injury is fairly traceable to the challenged conduct; and
  3. it is likely to be redressed if the requested relief is granted.

See Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464, 472 (1982); Gladstone, Realtors v. Village of Bellwood, 441 U.S. 91, 99 (1979); Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Organization, 426 U.S. 26, 37 (1976).

In addition to the constitutional requirements of Article III, courts have developed a set of prudential considerations to limit standing in federal court to prevent a plaintiff "from adjudicating 'abstract questions of wide public significance' which amount to 'generalized grievances' pervasively shared and most appropriately addressed in the representative branches." See Valley Forge, 454 U.S. at 474-75, quoting Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 499-500 (1975). Speculative claims that a proposed governmental action may result in injury to a plaintiff are insufficient to confer standing. See O'Shea v. Littleton, 414 U.S. 488, 497 (1974). The required injury must be both real and immediate, not conjectural or hypothetical. See Golden v. Zwickler, 394 U.S. 103, 109-10 (1969).
MODS: The above is not subject to copyright.

So. Let's say I have sufficient money, as a private citizen, to hire great lawyers and bring suit. It is very likely, as i read it, that a federal court would say I do not have "standing" because as a plaintiff I flunk #1 above. I have not "suffered a distinct and palpable injury". Ditto if some entity such as, say, The Sierra Club or a political party or possibly even Congress. Has Congress suffered a "distinct and palpable injury? Has Congress, in its role representing all The People suffered such an injury? It's not clear to me.

Going beyond the simple questions #1, #2, and #3 above, there the other issues in bold above.

Last edited by moguldreamer; 09-05-2022 at 08:57 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-05-2022, 08:52 PM
 
3,020 posts, read 1,100,667 times
Reputation: 6014
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnff View Post
The question would be where did the money for those loans come from? If it came from the Treasury, then it would become an expense when marked off the books. Probably somewhere in the budget there is an appropriate for some small amount of dollars to cover defaulted or forgiven loans. Which would not be enough to the total under discussion here.
I understand your argument. By analogy, I'm going to point to something unrelated - but the analogy is the thing to look at. Most states (perhaps even the Federal Government) have implemented laws saying a merchant cannot charge a customer more for using a credit card in a transaction. Yet, gasoline stations everywhere charge more. How is this possible? The legal argument is they do not charge more - they give a discount for a cash transaction. As consumers, you and I say that is a distinction without a difference, but the courts say "fine." The analogy is that Courts do strange things.

I agree completely it is a giveaway. I don't like it, but my personal preference isn't particularly important. Moreover governmental accounting is a different beast from financial accounting for private sector entities.

Regardless of governmental lawyers arguing A or B or C, it is a giveaway that our elected representatives didn't allocate monies for.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tnff View Post
They wouldn't have to declare the Act unconstitutional; only affirm the Executive Branch cannot expend funds not appropriated by Congress.
This isn't the first time. President Obama did a few things regarding spending money on Obamacare. President Trump shifted money from one place to another to build The Wall on the southern border. Litigation has followed.

As a mere mortal, I've never understood how those Presidents could do that with the stroke of a pen.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2022, 08:54 PM
 
Location: North Carolina
666 posts, read 928,731 times
Reputation: 590
Quote:
Originally Posted by moguldreamer View Post
In order for the issue to make its way to SCOTUS, there must be litigation. It isn't clear who would have standing to initiate such a law suit such that it could make its way to SCOTUS.
I heard today on youtube (forget the news website quoted) that Sen. Ted Cruz and a legal group out of Texas have started soliciting people with standing. One theory was, they could find a student who makes 126K/year (just over the forgiveness salary threshold) and wants to sue because of being left out of the loan forgiveness , or for example a recent grad who just paid off all their loans, and sues if they end up being left out of the forgiveness. 2 possible kinds of people with standing. If Cruz finds one or some willing to go to court, then it could make its way into the courts and be challenged that way.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2022, 09:06 PM
 
3,020 posts, read 1,100,667 times
Reputation: 6014
Quote:
Originally Posted by gball721 View Post
I heard today on youtube (forget the news website quoted) that Sen. Ted Cruz and a legal group out of Texas have started soliciting people with standing. One theory was, they could find a student who makes 126K/year (just over the forgiveness salary threshold) and wants to sue because of being left out of the loan forgiveness , or for example a recent grad who just paid off all their loans, and sues if they end up being left out of the forgiveness. 2 possible kinds of people with standing. If Cruz finds one or some willing to go to court, then it could make its way into the courts and be challenged that way.
Those might work. But then again, see the "standing" discussion in post #41 above (and I'm not an expert).

IF granted standing (and it is still a big "IF") then the lawsuit would likely focus on how removed from the Covid Emergency the Biden giveaway is structured. It really is just a plain old vanilla giveaway that doesn't have anything to do with the Covid Emergency - the supposed legal basis of the giveaway.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2022, 03:10 AM
 
Location: Oregon, formerly Texas
9,476 posts, read 6,276,642 times
Reputation: 16375
I looked up the "standing" issue, and from I can tell, legal scholars are unsure. There are a lot of ways someone could make a case the loan forgiveness harmed them but it's not clear cut. It's kind indirect "harm" through missing out on something other people get.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2022, 07:03 AM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
8,474 posts, read 4,711,806 times
Reputation: 10676
I have a friend who had $5,000 in debt remaining, and she qualifies for the $10K forgiveness, but she was very worried about the process and didn't want to have to worry about whether or not it is legal, so she just went ahead and paid off her remaining debt. She said she also didn't want to go through the who application process.

So I'm not sure whether or not it is legal, but I do know people (my friend) who are thinking/worried about that and have decided to just pay off their debt themselves, so they don't have to worry about questions surrounding the loan forgiveness.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2022, 07:26 AM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
8,474 posts, read 4,711,806 times
Reputation: 10676
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnff View Post
I would argue Congress. The Constitution limits the ability appropriate funds to Congress. The President executes the funded programs only within the limit of the funds appropriated. He cannot exceed the appropriation. Various laws and acts may have language that allows the Secretary of ED or the President to forgive loans, but I doubt has appropriated the roughly half a trillion dollars under discussion here. The President has only limited ability to move funds around within those appropriations as well.

So this is far from a done deal and will likely get challenged before it ever gets implemented.
Very interesting perspective. Thank you for providing. If Congress gets involved, it will get dicey. I also have already heard about future legal challenges as well.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2022, 01:53 PM
 
1,009 posts, read 1,441,757 times
Reputation: 767
I find it surprising that the loan forgiveness would be greater for an individuals economic state in the past. Is there any precedent for policy of this type?

To answer the OP question: It's legality is not much in doubt since The Heroes Act of 2003 provides for the Dept. of Ed to forgive loan principal in a national emergency. Since, early 2020 we have been in a state of "national emergency".
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2022, 02:34 PM
 
Location: Shawnee-on-Delaware, PA
6,978 posts, read 6,059,680 times
Reputation: 13808
Quote:
Originally Posted by moguldreamer View Post
First, I'm not a constitutional scholar.

Second, this is the United States of America, not the United Taxpayers of America.

Could a State sue? More likely to have standing, but not it isn't clear. Again, I'll defer to any constitutional scholar.
Glad we all agree we're not Constitutional scholars.

But laws and executive orders get challenged in court all the time. Why does this particular executive action have to pass through the eye of a needle, but all the others didn't?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2022, 03:29 PM
 
Location: Wartrace,TN
7,267 posts, read 11,536,921 times
Reputation: 14706
I don't believe it will happen without congress. A bigger concern is whether it will become a permanent "giveaway" available to all college students in the future. If it does become permanent the only thing I see happening is colleges raising tuition to match the "giveaway".

The best I could agree with is interest rate reductions to maybe the federal funds rate.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2023, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top