SCOTUS struck down a specific program based (if I recall correctly) in part on legislation signed during the pandemic, as well as on older statutes. They did no say he doesn't have the authority to forgive debt, only that he didn't have authority to forgive debt with the plan he proposed, using the legal justification he cited.
This program has a different design and the administration clearly believes that it is consistent with authority granted by Congress to manage the student loan programs, including provisions for loan forgiveness.
This will end up back in the courts, and probably the Supreme Court. If SCOTUS strikes this plan down, then it won't go into effect.
This isn't some weird, bizarre, never-been-done dynamic. Presidents of both parties (governors at the state level) often revise plans and programs after being shut down by the courts. If a program or plan is struck down, they'll look to see if there's another way to implement it that's constitutional and legal. Trump went back to the court (if I remember correctly) on issues around the border wall and immigration restrictions after his initial plans were struck down.
This is exactly what our system of checks and balances is designed to do, and it's something to be celebrated.
Be the first to reply to this disagreement.