All right, today President Biden set the push a brand
new plan to cancel student loan debt for millions of
Americans when he visits the key state of Wisconsin.
The Supreme Court struck down the last plan back in
June,
but the White House believes this new target targeted one
will clear any legal hurdles as those who owe more
than they borrow could see up to
$20,000 in interest wiped out,
to name a few. Fox News legal analyst Greg Jarrett
is here to react.
So Greg, you know, I went back,
looked at the opinion the courts was they were pretty
clear that the White House,
they don't have that authority to do that.
So how are they maneuvering around something that is pretty
clear?
Well, they're inventing a different
run around the Supreme Court decision.
In so doing, you know,
Joe Biden is brazenly defying the law and then he
has the audacity the arrogance to brag about
it. Admitting recently yes, the Supreme Court blocked my plan
is illegal.
But then he said quote that won't stop me.
You know, no amount of lawlessness is beyond Joe Biden
by dictate.
What he's really doing is shredding the Constitution.
He changed his method of loan forgiveness and the latest
plan.
But you know, the same legal principles that make it
unconstitutional still apply.
He's not cancelling anything, Lawrence.
He's transferring billions of debt from borrowers to taxpayers.
And under the Constitution, only Congress has the power to
do that,
as the Supreme Court explained in their decision.
So, you know, this is a stunning act of contempt.
Biden says he doesn't care about the separations of powers,
the law or the Constitution.
So I sort of ask you here,
who's the dictator? Who's the threat to democracy?
So Greg, I guess that then becomes the big question
because you're right,
the court was clear. And then Biden made it very
clear that he was wasn't going to respect that
thorough branch of government. So
how does the Supreme Court respond to something like this?
Does do? Do they wait a long time?
Do they wait to the next session,
or do they address this with speed?
Well, 11 states have coalesced to file two different lawsuits
to block this latest plan by Joe Biden.
One has already been filed in Kansas,
another forthcoming in the state of Missouri,
and their arguments are principally going to be the same
as their last successful challenge Because,
you know, Joe Biden here is is buying votes so
desperate to get young people to re elect him.
You know, he's really willing to undermine both Congress and
the Supreme Court.
The new plan, like the old one,
is not just illegal. It's grossly unfair,
for giving debt helps those who went to college at
the expense of those who didn't.
But it also punishes Lawrence students and parents who scrupulously
save for years to pay for college without loans.
And it also, of course,
punishes those who have sacrificed an enormous amount to repay
faithfully their loans,
as they promised. You know,
Greg, I'm just curious because,
you know, in dissent, Kagan and a lot of the
justices make the argument that they shouldn't be involved in
these sort of disputes.
But the president is almost putting the court in,
in these disputes, and I think he kind of wants
that for the campaign trail to say the conservative,
the conservative court is blocking progress.
Do you, do you get that vibe from him?
Oh, totally. I I think it's a great point you're
making,
Lawrence. And you know, this is a pattern with Joe
Biden
When confronted with an important issue,
he says, I don't have the authority to do that.
It's unconstitutional. Couple of months go by and then he
does it.
The eviction moratorium, the vaccine mandate,
the racially discriminatory farm program,
and of course the student debt forgiveness plan.
All of these were pretty clearly lawless.
And yet he went ahead and did it.
He gets slapped down by the US Supreme Court,
and then he turns it into pure politics by railing
against the High Court and trying to incentivize Democrats to
stack the court.
It's a rallying call, and he's doing it during an
election year.
I think we should take note of it.
Greg, excellent legal analysis, as always.
Thank you. Thanks, Laura.