Judging Freedom - Biden_s student loan forgiveness plan Update

Episode Date: October 21, 2022

Resolve to earn your degree in the new year in the Bay with WGU. WGU is an online accredited university that specializes in personalized learning. With courses available 24-7 and monthly start dates, you can earn your degree on your schedule. You may even be able to graduate sooner than you think by demonstrating mastery of the material you know. Make 2025 the year you focus on your future. Learn more at wgu.edu. Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Friday, October 21st, 2022. It's about 1.35 in the afternoon here on the East Coast of the United States. The Biden administration experienced a series of victories in federal court

over efforts by state attorneys general to block the president's student loan forgiveness. Now, in my opinion, the student loan forgiveness is unconstitutional, that only Congress can forgive a federal debt, not the president. And there are people on both sides of the political aisle, on both sides of the ideological divide, and all sides of constitutional scholars, and we're on the same page on this. Nevertheless, the president is going forward with it. But even more unconstitutional was efforts by a Republican state attorneys general to block the student loan forgiveness program. Now, you might say, well, what do they have to do with it? Well, that's what two federal judges and one Supreme Court justice asked.

What do the states have to do with it? Nothing. It's what two federal judges and one Supreme Court justice asked. What do the states have to do with it? Nothing. It's not like these debts are falling to the states to pay once individuals can't pay. A little bit of background. You apply for a student loan. You agree to a federal backup. You profess your loyalty to the government of the United States of America. The government gets you the loan. The money comes from the bank. The bank loans you the money. You promise to pay the bank back.

The federal government promises to pay the bank if you're unable to pay them back. So when the federal government tells you you don't have to pay the bank back, the federal government has to pay the bank back. The states have nothing to do with back. The federal government has to pay the bank back. The states have nothing to do with this. You had a boon. You borrowed money and you thought you owed it back. You thought you owed a lot of interest. A president came along, in my view, a fiscally irresponsible president, but a big hearted one, and says, you don't have to pay that money back. We'll pay the banks for you. In order for someone to interfere with that financial relationship, they would have to be a part of the financial relationship. The states are not a part of that financial relationship. So the lawsuits that were

filed in Wisconsin and in Missouri, in federal court in both states, were dismissed by federal judges who said to the attorneys general, you don't have standing. Standing means your ox is being gored by what's happening or could be gored by the outcome. And the state attorneys general have no stake in the outcome. The case in Wisconsin was appealed on an emergency basis all the way to the Supreme Court, and Justice Barrett declined the application on behalf of the court, and then she took a poll of the court, and it must have been unanimous because there were no dissents recorded. So the Wisconsin denial went all the way to the Supreme Court. The Missouri denial was yesterday.

So the Obama administration has begun making available online the applications for people to be absolved from the student loan program. So there's a couple of takeaways from this. Can the president forgive a debt that Congress has authorized him to incur? Absolutely not. Even Mrs. Pelosi agrees with that. Only Congress can do that. So I don't know where this will go. I can't imagine a future Congress saying to these people, you now owe us the money after they've been absolved, because then the courts would get involved about a promise being made. You don't owe us the money and then being taken away. Second takeaway is state attorneys general in the modern era, I'm going to say in the past 25 years, have begun filing lawsuits that they

have no business filing because the outcome of the lawsuit does not affect the people in their state, at least not directly enough. Theoretically, everyone is affected by the loan forgiveness because it increases the federal debt. But the Constitution requires that in order to be involved in a lawsuit, in order to challenge what the federal government is doing, you have to suffer a harm unique from all others. So if the Congress raises taxes as a single taxpayer, if you file a suit saying my taxes are too high, they're going to throw the suit out because your harm is the same as all others. It's not unique from all others. In the case of the state attorneys general, those were political lawsuits. So they could basically say state attorneys general, those were political lawsuits. So they could basically say to their bases, look what I did. I tried to stop the fiscally

irresponsible Joe Biden in his tracks. I understand it. I get it. That's a political argument, not a legal one. And that's why federal judges, even those appointed by Republican presidents, have thrown those cases out. So the loan forgiveness program goes forward. Once a loan is forgiven, that is permanent. A new Congress cannot reinstate it at any time in the future. If you're in that category, God bless you. Good luck. You got a freebie. I guess the president wants you to vote for the Democrats in three weeks. Well, there are more reasons to decide how to vote than your personal obligations to a bank that the federal government has backed up.

More as we get it. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Resolve to earn your degree in the new year in the Bay with WGU. With courses available online 24-7 and monthly start dates, WGU offers maximum flexibility so you can focus on your future. Learn more at wgu.edu.