Get the latest Syracuse news delivered right to your inbox.
Subscribe to our newsletter here.

After oral arguments in February and ahead of the expected June decision in Supreme Court cases that could strike down President Joe Biden’s student loan relief plan, experts weighed in on the consequences the ruling could have on Syracuse University students.

Biden announced the plan, which could forgive up to $400 billion in student loan debt, in August 2022. But two lawsuits, filed in September and October by two individuals and six states, challenged the effort immediately.

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Feb. 28 for the two cases – Biden v. Nebraska and Department of Education v. Brown – both of which call into question the scope of the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act, a 2003 law which outlines the Secretary of Education’s powers in a national emergency. The Biden administration argued the plan is justified in response to the COVID-19 pandemic under the act.

SU College of Law professor Jenny Breen said the rulings in both cases could signal a sustained movement by the court to impede the federal government’s ability to respond to emergencies like the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Government is often the only entity that is capable of responding to these challenges and the Supreme Court majority seems pretty set on preventing the government from acting, which is disappointing,” Breen said.

At SU, a private institution, the eventual ruling could have significant implications for students and alumni. During the 2021-2022 academic year, 83% of SU students received some form of financial support, mainly through SU-based grants and scholarships, according to the university’s website.

SU students have voiced concerns about the university continuing to raise tuition, especially during and in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Students are paying $58,440 in tuition for the 2022-2023 academic year, an increase of nearly $3,000, or 4.5%, compared to 2021-2022. Between the 2017-2018 and 2022-2023 academic years, SU’s tuition increased by over $13,000, or about 29.4%.

Stephanie Zaso | Digital Design Director

One question regarding the Supreme Court’s pending decision, Breen said, regards whether the conservative majority will invoke the major questions doctrine. The doctrine argues the court can reject regulatory authority if Congress has not “clearly empowered” federal government agencies with authority of a specific case, or in cases involving “vast political and economic significance,” according to a November 2022 report by the Congressional Research Service.

David Driesen, a professor in SU’s College of Law who focuses in constitutional law, said he thinks it’s likely the Supreme Court will rely on and apply the major questions doctrine to invalidate Biden’s loan forgiveness plan, even if the language outlined in the HEROES Act authorizes the administration to create the relief program.

“The court is using an approach that’s motivated by constitutional concerns where they do not honor general language in statutes if they think Congress should have made a more specific decision about a major question,” Driesen said. “They don’t like the executive branch of the government resolving major questions they think Congress should have resolved.”

Breen also said because the doctrine is broadly defined, the Supreme Court will likely use it to strike down the loan forgiveness program. According to the Congressional Research Service, the court has not specifically outlined what legislative acts constitute congressional authorization or clarify when an agency’s regulatory action leads to the doctrine being invoked.

The Supreme Court used the doctrine to strike down the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s vaccine and testing mandates for businesses with at least 100 employees in National Federation of Independent Business v. OSHA, as well as to curtail the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to enforce carbon dioxide regulations in Massachusetts v. EPA, Breen said.

The Supreme Court most recently cited the doctrine in February 2022 in its 6-3 decision in West Virginia v. EPA. The majority ruled that the agency lacked the authority to institute limits on carbon emissions from power plants under the Clean Power Plan.

With the decision date nearing, Breen said the doctrine would ultimately prevent Congress from achieving its goals and limit the ability of federal agencies to take meaningful action.

The pandemic repayment pause Biden added during the relief plan legal battle will end 6o days after the court’s decision is made, but payments could begin 60 days after June 30 if the final ruling is announced after that date.

Published on March 22, 2023 at 1:07 am

Contact Dominic: dcchiapp@syr.edu | @DominicChiappo2