Your Basic Needs: Food, Shelter and The TRUTH
Federal Judge Takes Sledgehammer To Biden’s Student Debt Amnesty — But Do Democrats Even Care?
Publisher's Note: This post appears here courtesy of the The Daily Wire. The author of this post is Tim Meads.
Amidst the fallout from the meager Republican showing on Tuesday came a breath of fresh air, courtesy of one U.S. district court judge in Texas who took a sledgehammer to President Joe Biden's attempt to bailout certain student loans - while also taking shots at President Barack Obama and every other leftist who believes in a living constitution.
The real question now is whether or not the Biden administration will really even care that loan amnesty was dismantled. As a cynic, it served its purpose. The announcement of the bailout revved up the youth vote, which helped put Democrats over the finishing line in many races.
On Thursday, Judge Mark T. Pittman ruled that "no one can plausibly deny that it was either one of the largest delegations of legislative power to the executive branch, or one of the largest exercises of legislative power without congressional authority in the history of the United States."
The judge argued three key reasons why it was such an egregious decision.
The first, Pittman noted, is that the law cited by the Department of Education for justification of the bailout - the HEROES Act - does not stipulate that it can be applied to student loans.
Pittman wrote, "the HEROES Act does not mention loan forgiveness. If Congress provided clear congressional authorization for $400 billion in student loan forgiveness via the HEROES Act, it would have mentioned loan forgiveness."
Per the court's ruling in West Virginia v. The Environmental Protection Agency, Congress must give explicit orders to agencies. They don't have the power to go beyond what's written by Congress simply because they deem that it would benefit the nation.
The second reason is that the Biden administration attempted to justify the bailout by citing COVID, but didn't accurately explain why forgiving student debt was essential for addressing hardship because of the pandemic.
Pittman even used Biden's own words against him on this point.
"The COVID-19 pandemic was declared a national emergency almost three years ago and declared weeks before the Program by the President as 'over,'" the judge observed. "Thus, it is unclear if COVID-19 is still a 'national emergency' under the Act."
And third, Pittman cited that even the Biden administration suggested that it might not have proper authority on this matter.
"'The agency's past interpretations of the relevant statute' is another clue that the Secretary lacks clear congressional authorization for the Program," Pittman argued.
Consider this, the Biden administration created this program even after the Supreme Court made it explicitly clear in West Virginia that federal agencies cannot go outside of what Congress has ordered them to do.
It was a plain-as-day ruling at the Supreme Court in June. So, what do the self-proclaimed Defenders of Democracy do after that? Did the party of norms and decency act in accordance with the law?
It would appear not. It barreled right ahead and gave its base what it wanted - a handout. In turn, polls show that young leftist voters rewarded them in droves.
Yet now, millions of gender degree grads and underwater basket weavers might not even get those tax dollars because the Biden administration announced it would stop the program.
As reported, this decision is already in the process of being appealed by the Biden administration. It could very well wind up at the High Court where it will more like than not decisively lose - as outlined by Pittman.
For some reason, every single legacy media outlet points out that Pittman is a judge appointed by President Donald J. Trump - as if that should taint his decision.
Nonetheless, critics ignore his sound reasoning.
"In this country, we are not ruled by an all-powerful executive with a pen and a phone," Pittman stated in his conclusion - a throwback to Obama's infamous line. "Instead, we are ruled by a Constitution that provides for three distinct and independent branches of government."
He added that keeping those checks and balances is necessary for the U.S. to survive - regardless of the moment at hand.
"The Court is not blind to the current political division in our country," Pittman said. "But it is fundamental to the survival of our Republic that the separation of powers as outlined in our Constitution be preserved."
So, not all is lost. Some folks in key positions still believe in the constitution.
The views expressed in this piece are the author's own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Go Back
Amidst the fallout from the meager Republican showing on Tuesday came a breath of fresh air, courtesy of one U.S. district court judge in Texas who took a sledgehammer to President Joe Biden's attempt to bailout certain student loans - while also taking shots at President Barack Obama and every other leftist who believes in a living constitution.
The real question now is whether or not the Biden administration will really even care that loan amnesty was dismantled. As a cynic, it served its purpose. The announcement of the bailout revved up the youth vote, which helped put Democrats over the finishing line in many races.
On Thursday, Judge Mark T. Pittman ruled that "no one can plausibly deny that it was either one of the largest delegations of legislative power to the executive branch, or one of the largest exercises of legislative power without congressional authority in the history of the United States."
The judge argued three key reasons why it was such an egregious decision.
The first, Pittman noted, is that the law cited by the Department of Education for justification of the bailout - the HEROES Act - does not stipulate that it can be applied to student loans.
Pittman wrote, "the HEROES Act does not mention loan forgiveness. If Congress provided clear congressional authorization for $400 billion in student loan forgiveness via the HEROES Act, it would have mentioned loan forgiveness."
Per the court's ruling in West Virginia v. The Environmental Protection Agency, Congress must give explicit orders to agencies. They don't have the power to go beyond what's written by Congress simply because they deem that it would benefit the nation.
The second reason is that the Biden administration attempted to justify the bailout by citing COVID, but didn't accurately explain why forgiving student debt was essential for addressing hardship because of the pandemic.
Pittman even used Biden's own words against him on this point.
"The COVID-19 pandemic was declared a national emergency almost three years ago and declared weeks before the Program by the President as 'over,'" the judge observed. "Thus, it is unclear if COVID-19 is still a 'national emergency' under the Act."
And third, Pittman cited that even the Biden administration suggested that it might not have proper authority on this matter.
"'The agency's past interpretations of the relevant statute' is another clue that the Secretary lacks clear congressional authorization for the Program," Pittman argued.
Consider this, the Biden administration created this program even after the Supreme Court made it explicitly clear in West Virginia that federal agencies cannot go outside of what Congress has ordered them to do.
It was a plain-as-day ruling at the Supreme Court in June. So, what do the self-proclaimed Defenders of Democracy do after that? Did the party of norms and decency act in accordance with the law?
It would appear not. It barreled right ahead and gave its base what it wanted - a handout. In turn, polls show that young leftist voters rewarded them in droves.
Yet now, millions of gender degree grads and underwater basket weavers might not even get those tax dollars because the Biden administration announced it would stop the program.
As reported, this decision is already in the process of being appealed by the Biden administration. It could very well wind up at the High Court where it will more like than not decisively lose - as outlined by Pittman.
For some reason, every single legacy media outlet points out that Pittman is a judge appointed by President Donald J. Trump - as if that should taint his decision.
Nonetheless, critics ignore his sound reasoning.
"In this country, we are not ruled by an all-powerful executive with a pen and a phone," Pittman stated in his conclusion - a throwback to Obama's infamous line. "Instead, we are ruled by a Constitution that provides for three distinct and independent branches of government."
He added that keeping those checks and balances is necessary for the U.S. to survive - regardless of the moment at hand.
"The Court is not blind to the current political division in our country," Pittman said. "But it is fundamental to the survival of our Republic that the separation of powers as outlined in our Constitution be preserved."
So, not all is lost. Some folks in key positions still believe in the constitution.
The views expressed in this piece are the author's own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Home
Contact
About
Service Rates
Privacy Policy
Follow on Facebook
Subscribe to Newsletters
Rss Feed
Keywords
Eastern NC Now & ENC NOW © Copyright 1998-2024 All Rights Reserved.
