On Monday, a significant legal development occurred when a federal appellate court intervened and halted a regulation put forth by the administration of President Joe Biden. If this rule is not checked, it could make it easier for student loan borrowers to get debt relief if they claim they were misled about the quality of the education they received.
The core of the issue revolves around a policy change that will forgive student debts for those who borrowed money to pursue higher education. This policy revision is for institutions found to have deceived students about key issues, such as their coursework’s practical application to employment prospects within their chosen field or their anticipated earnings after graduation.
Career Colleges and Schools of Texas (a group representing for-profit institutions of higher education) took legal action in February against this regulation. They are concerned that the rules are so broad that they cover unintentional actions by educational institutions. They also claim that the regulation gives excessive power to the Department of Education as an executive branch, giving it the same powers as a court to determine eligibility for debt relief.
Lawyers for the administration counteract this argument by pointing out that there is a possibility of recourse in court for any decisions taken by the Department of Education regarding debt relief.
These educational institutions then approached a federal court judge in Texas to ask him to stop the enforcement of this regulation while the legal proceedings were ongoing. In a June ruling, despite their pleas, the judge denied their request. In a welcome turn of events, a panel consisting of three judges of the 5th U.S. The Circuit Court of Appeals intervened Monday and issued a concise order temporarily halting the regulation. The panel also set up hearings in November to dig deeper into the issue.
This panel of three distinguished judges in New Orleans includes Edith Jones, who was appointed to the court by former President Ronald Reagan. Also, Stuart Kyle Duncan, Cory Wilson, and two other distinguished nominees from former president Donald Trump. This is a significant development that highlights the importance of judicial nominations, and their long-term potential impact on policy interpretations.
