The two challenges to the Biden administration’s student loan forgiveness plan at the Supreme Court may ultimately be decided on narrow grounds. The justices may conclude that the parties challenging the program don’t have legal standing to bring the cases. But Tuesday’s arguments served as a major warning about conservatives’ ambitious hopes for the “major questions” doctrine — their new tool of choice for voiding Biden administration policies.
The “doctrine,” as such, is new. Before 2022, the justices did not even call it the “major questions” doctrine. It was simply the idea, rarely employed, that certain actions by the executive branch have such significant economic or political effect that a vague grant of legal authority claimed by the administration couldn’t be used to justify them. Even as recently as last term, the court — in an opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts — explained that an executive action that a majority of justices decides addresses a “major question” would be upheld so long as “clear congressional authorization” is shown. Because the doctrine is barely tethered to any underlying principles, however, it could easily become an ever-shifting legal policy that expands to fit whatever government program the 6-3 conservative majority of the court wishes to end.
The doctrine is barely tethered to any underlying principles
The growing elasticity of the “major questions” doctrine was on full display Tuesday, as several of the conservative justices picked up the popular online retort that loan forgiveness is somehow “unfair” because some people have already paid off their student loans and others chose not to take out such loans at all (often because they didn’t need to). This is a policy argument, although even that has its limits, and not a legal argument. But that didn’t stop several of the conservatives from repeatedly focusing on it and finding a way to claim it was legally relevant in Tuesday’s…
Read the full article here
