Justices agree to pause briefing about Biden-era Loan Forgiveness Rule
SCOTUS NEWS
The Supreme Court on Thursday afternoon agreed to pause the briefing in a challenge to a Biden-era rule intended streamline the process for reviewing requests for student loan forgiveness from borrowers whose schools defrauded them or were shut down. (Amy Lutz via Shutterstock)
The Supreme Court on Thursday afternoon agreed to pause the briefing in a challenge to a Biden-era rule intended to streamline the process for reviewing requests for student loan forgiveness from borrowers whose schools defrauded them or were shut down. In a short, unsigned order the justices granted Acting Solicitor Sarah Harris’ request to give the Department of Education more time to review the regulations. But the justices declined to put the briefing in three other cases on hold, presumably because – unlike in the Department of Education case – the challengers in each case, who had sought Supreme Court review, opposed the government’s request.
Harris came to the Supreme Court on Jan. 24, asking the justices to temporarily halt the briefing in four cases. She indicated that, with the change in administrations from former President Joe Biden to President Donald Trump, the Environmental Protection Agency (in three cases) and the Department of Education intended to reconsider the regulations, agency determinations, or actions at the center of each dispute.
The challenger in Department of Education v. Career Colleges and Schools of Texas, a group of for-profit colleges, consented to the Trump administration’s request to put the briefing schedule in the case on hold, and the justices granted that request on Thursday.
However, other challengers did not consent to similar requests. Jeffrey Wall, an attorney representing fuel producers who were challenging the EPA’s grant of a waiver to California that allowed the state set standards for limiting greenhouse-gas emission and required all passenger vehicles in the state be zero-emissions by 2035, acknowledged that his client’s “welcomed” the EPA’s decision to revisit its waiver. The justices denied Harris’s request on Thursday in respect of the remaining three cases. As is often the case, they did not explain their reasoning.
Briefing will now move forward in the three cases, which are likely to be argued during the court’s March argument session.
This article was originally published at Howe on the Court.
