By Charles.
C. W. Cooke
Thursday,
November 10, 2022
Here’s the Washington Post:
A federal judge in Texas on Thursday blocked President Biden’s student
loan forgiveness program, delivering a victory to a conservative advocacy group
that sued to strike down the plan.
This was
not a victory for “a conservative advocacy group.” It was a victory for the
rule of law. It was a victory for Article I. It was a victory for separation of
powers. It was a victory for people who can read. It was a victory, in other
words, for America’s beautiful constitutional order.
This
particular suit had to do with the
Administrative Procedure Act. As the Post noted, “the suit alleges the
administration violated federal procedures by denying borrowers the opportunity
to provide public comment before unveiling the program.” But that’s just one small
part of the order’s extraordinary illegality. From the start, it has been
entirely obvious that if the question ever reached the merits of this case, it
would be nixed by the courts. And so it has. In his opinion Judge Pittman
recorded that Biden’s order “does not provide clear congressional
authorization for the program proposed by the Secretary.” Specifically, he
observed that student-loan forgiveness is not mentioned in the statute that
Biden pretended gave him authority; that, because Biden himself had declared
the pandemic to be over, there was no justifying “emergency” in the first
place; and, finally, that the agency that was expected to execute the order had
found recently that it had no such authority. Because this is a “major
question,” the judge concluded, the court was not obliged to defer.
The Post records
that this development
comes after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit last month
granted a stay against the loan forgiveness program in a separate lawsuit
brought by six Republican-led states. The cases are among a growing number of
legal challenges to stop Biden’s program. Some of those suits, including one
filed in Indiana and another in Wisconsin, have been dismissed for lack of
standing, but others are ongoing.
The case
in the 8th Circuit is still pending. There is no reason to believe that it will
end differently than this one.
No comments:
Post a Comment