JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. – Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey has announced that the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the court order he obtained at the district court to block Joe Biden’s and Kamala Harris’ latest illegal student loan cancellation scheme. His lawsuit targeted what the federal government calls the “SAVE” Plan, which in reality would have cost Americans a half-trillion dollars – $45 billion more than its last unlawful student loan plan.
“The Eighth Circuit rightfully recognized that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris will do anything they can to evade the Constitution when it comes to ‘forgiving’ student loans in an election year,” said Attorney General Bailey. “This court order is a stark reminder to the Biden-Harris Administration that Congress did not grant them the authority to saddle working Americans with $500 billion in someone else’s Ivy League debt. This is a huge win for every American who still believes in paying their own way.”
The Eighth Circuit upheld the Eastern District of Missouri’s original preliminary injunction and took it even further, holding today that “The Government is, for any borrower whose loans are governed in whole or in part by the terms of the Improving Income Driven Repayment for the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program and the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) Program, 88 Fed. Reg. 43820, enjoined from any further forgiveness of principal or interest, from not charging borrowers accrued interest, and from further implementing SAVE’s payment-threshold provisions. This injunction will remain in effect until further order of this court or the Supreme Court of the United States.”
The United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of Attorney General Bailey’s previous challenge to the Biden Administration’s unilateral and unlawful wealth transfer of hundreds of billions of dollars in student loan debt.
In a 6-3 decision, the Court struck down Biden’s repayment plan as unconstitutional, citing the massive $430 billion-plus impact on the federal budget without express authority from Congress. The Court held that Missouri’s student loan servicing company, MOHELA, was an arm of Missouri’s state government, and therefore, granted the states standing to challenge the student loan plan.
Joining General Bailey in filing suit the second time around were the attorneys general of Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, North Dakota, Ohio, and Oklahoma.
In the suit, the States asserted, “Just last year, the Supreme Court struck down an attempt by the President to force teachers, truckers, and farmers to pay for the student loan debt of other Americans—to the enormous tune of $430 billion. In striking down that attempt, the Court declared that the President cannot ‘unilaterally alter large sections of the American economy.’ Undeterred, the President is at it again, even bragging that ‘the Supreme Court blocked it. They blocked it. But that didn’t stop me.’”
The States noted, “Yet again, the President is unilaterally trying to impose an extraordinarily expensive and controversial policy that he could not get through Congress. This latest attempt to sidestep the Constitution is only the most recent instance in a long but troubling pattern of the President relying on innocuous language from decades-old statutes to impose drastic, costly policy changes on the American people without their consent.”