this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2023
414 points (97.9% liked)

politics

18651 readers
4967 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A federal court on Monday blocked new Biden administration rules aimed at forgiving the debt of student borrowers who attended colleges that misled them or closed suddenly.

The move by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, by a panel comprised of Republican presidential appointees, was in response to a request from Career Colleges and Schools of Texas for a nationwide injunction on the new version of so-called borrower defense rules. The Biden administration's version of the rules ease and clarify the process for securing that relief, including by allowing borrowers to submit claims if they believe they were misled by their institution.

CCST represents private career-oriented or trade schools in the Lone Star state, many of them for-profit colleges. Individuals who attend for-profit schools are disproportionately likely to take and default on student loan debt, in large part because they promise lucrative outcomes but have a track record of seldom producing those results. Federal policies have been developed over the years in an effort to relieve such borrowers of that debt.

The U.S. Education Department under President Joe Biden has worked to add to that pile of policies, including with its own borrower defense to repayment rule. Through borrower defense to repayment – or borrower defense for short – students who have been defrauded by their schools have their loans discharged.

When CCST filed its lawsuit earlier this year on behalf of more than 70 Texas institutions, it said the Education Department's rule was created "with a thumb on the scale to maximize the number of approved claims and, ultimately, further the administration’s loan forgiveness agenda."

Federal law has long allowed the discharge of loans for borrowers who have been misled or defrauded by their colleges. But getting loans canceled has been arduous and in many cases involved lawsuits against the federal government.

Biden has been applying this authority incrementally. In a settlement for a case that traces back to the Trump presidency known as Sweet v. Cardona, Biden agreed to forgive $6 billion in debt relief for nearly 300,000 borrowers, for example. That relief isn't affected by Monday's injunction. Still, the group behind that push for relief was frustrated by the block of Biden-era rules."It is necessary to protect students from being scammed and it ensures that predatory actions come to light and are stopped before they go on to harm even more students," said Eileen Connor, president and director of the Project on Predatory Student Lending, in a statement. "These organized, well-funded political attempts to weaponize the court system against the legal rights of borrowers underscore how stacked the system is against our clients.Also last month, the administration announced forgiveness for another 7,400 defrauded student borrowers in Colorado.

All in all, the administration has forgiven roughly $14.7 billion in loans for defrauded student borrowers. Nearly half a million borrowers had submitted borrower defense claims and had pending applications as of January 2023.

The ruling Monday delays the start of Biden's regulations, which also include automatic relief for borrowers whose institutions were closed.

Advocates in favor of debt relief lamented the decision and stressed the importance of strong borrower defense policies. "We cannot afford a green light for dishonest schools to continue harming students," said Aaron Ament, president of Student Defense, in a statement. "Defrauded borrowers are legally entitled to relief and their institutions should be held accountable. Until these protections are restored, countless students are at risk of being taken advantage of by higher ed profiteers who are exploiting students with little accountability.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] porkins 51 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

We cannot afford a green light for dishonest schools to continue harming students

This also should apply to skyrocketing tuition rates due to the institutions knowing that students would be pressured to take the predatory government loans. The government shouldn’t have been willing to pay that much to begin with, which would force the universities to lower their rates.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But if tuition was affordable, no one would join the army!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago

Sure, but SCOTUS has ensured that the president doesn’t have the power to do that and there’s no chance it passes congress. Going after for-profit scam institutions has generally been upheld by courts.