The Save plan – a means-tested program – was blocked from further implementation by Republican-appointed judges
A federal appeals court has sided with Republican-controlled states to deliver another setback to Joe Biden’s student loan relief plan designed to reduce monthly payments for millions of lower-income graduates and speed up debt forgiveness for some borrowers.
A unanimous, unsigned ruling issued on Friday by three Republican-appointed judges in Missouri blocked further implementation of the Saving on a Valuable Education (Save) plan – the Department of Education’s means-tested debt relief program that is being challenged by seven Republican-led states.
What standing, exactly, do these states have to sue over this?
—Them, absolutely
If I remember correctly, it’s the fact that these loans are held by companies who pay state tax. If the loans are paid out by the federal government, the states’ future tax revenues will be diminished.
It causes the state of Missouri to lose 44 million a year in fees collected. That’s why they were the only state to have standing.
If hypothetical future revenue is ground for states to sue the federal government, you might as well dissolve the federation.
It’s not hypothetical. They are collecting you money now. It’d be a loss of revenue Only 1 state was impacted and that’s is what moved it forward. Had Missouri not been part of the lawsuit, the case would have been kicked for standing.
When congress introduces regulations or taxes it can also reduce revenue that states have right now. And let’s not get started on international politics.
I was just answering the question as asked. I find standing bizarre in many of these situations. They rarely make sense to me but I’m not a lawyer. Luckily my lawyer friends find them baffling as well