Will Student Loan forgiveness stand? Nope.

[kia boyz '24]

If Tom Brady, Hov, Yeezy, and Diddy all got their PPP loans forgiven for their ill-advised business ventures then why the phuck don't I get something for signing the predatory ironclad student loan agreement damn near necessary to enter the professional workforce and become a homeowner before my first gray hair?

[kia boyz '24]

If Tom Brady, Hov, Yeezy, and Diddy all got their PPP loans forgiven for their ill-advised business ventures then why the phuck don't I get something for signing the predatory ironclad student loan agreement damn near necessary to enter the professional workforce and become a homeowner before my first gray hair?

That's a moral argument, not a legal one.

As said though I expect it to stand simply because the group of possible plaintiffs with standing while not non-existent is small and probably doesn't include anyone who wants to rock the boat.

Forgive my ignorance, but how does the federal government possess the power to discharge PPP loans serviced via 3rd-party lenders to legal properties and not student loans serviced via 3rd-party lenders to individuals?

[kia boyz '24]

If Tom Brady, Hov, Yeezy, and Diddy all got their PPP loans forgiven for their ill-advised business ventures then why the phuck don't I get something for signing the predatory ironclad student loan agreement damn near necessary to enter the professional workforce and become a homeowner before my first gray hair?

That's a moral argument, not a legal one.

As said though I expect it to stand simply because the group of possible plaintiffs with standing while not non-existent is small and probably doesn't include anyone who wants to rock the boat.

Forgive my ignorance, but how does the federal government possess the power to discharge PPP loans serviced via 3rd-party lenders to legal properties and not student loans serviced via 3rd-party lenders to individuals?

Different laws establishing both programs. I'm not saying that the government doesn't have the authority to discharge student loans as such and I haven't read the law in depth but the authority for each here would be established separately. That said another difference is I can't think of anyone with standing to sue against forgiving PPP loans. There are a few who exist for student loans even if they're unlikely to do so for reasons established above.

Right but why wouldn't the same legal principle of executive discretion in appropriating federal funds apply?

[kia boyz '24]

If Tom Brady, Hov, Yeezy, and Diddy all got their PPP loans forgiven for their ill-advised business ventures then why the phuck don't I get something for signing the predatory ironclad student loan agreement damn near necessary to enter the professional workforce and become a homeowner before my first gray hair?

That's a moral argument, not a legal one.

As said though I expect it to stand simply because the group of possible plaintiffs with standing while not non-existent is small and probably doesn't include anyone who wants to rock the boat.

Forgive my ignorance, but how does the federal government possess the power to discharge PPP loans serviced via 3rd-party lenders to legal properties and not student loans serviced via 3rd-party lenders to individuals?

Different laws establishing both programs. I'm not saying that the government doesn't have the authority to discharge student loans as such and I haven't read the law in depth but the authority for each here would be established separately. That said another difference is I can't think of anyone with standing to sue against forgiving PPP loans. There are a few who exist for student loans even if they're unlikely to do so for reasons established above.

Right but why wouldn't the same legal principle of executive discretion in appropriating federal funds apply?

It's not just about executive discretion, but also about what Congress specifically provides for through law. There's a famous concurring opinion from Justice Robert H. Jackson that is often discussed in law school as a good description of the president's powers:

First, “[w]hen the President acts pursuant to an express or implied authorization of Congress, his authority is at its maximum, for it includes all that he possesses in his own right plus all that Congress can delegate.” Youngstown, 343 U. S., at 635 (Jackson, J., concurring). Second, “[w]hen the President acts in absence of either a congressional grant or denial of authority, he can only rely upon his own independent powers, but there is a zone of twilight in which he and Congress may have concurrent authority, or in which its distribution is uncertain.” Id., at 637. In such a circumstance, Presidential authority can derive support from “congressional inertia, indifference or quiescence.” Ibid. Finally, “[w]hen the President takes measures incompatible with the expressed or implied will of Congress, his power is at its lowest ebb,” and the Court can sustain his actions “only by disabling the Congress from acting upon the subject.” Id., at 637–638.

For the PPP, I assume that the same law that authorized the program also specifically authorized loan forgiveness. For student loans, Congress never passed any law specifically authorizing the president to forgive loans in the context of COVID. The Biden administration has cited the HEROES Act as authorization for loan forgiveness, but some legal scholars have argued that the law is a flimsy pretext to go on, in part because it was passed in a very different context (some legal scholars have argued that he should've cited the Higher Education Act of 1965 instead). In other words, the PPP loan forgiveness program is clearly in the first zone of authority that Jackson talks about, whereas student loan forgiveness arguably isn't.

Fair enough regarding the CARES Acts' PPP loan forgiveness authorization, however the DOJ memo explicitly cites:

The
plain text of the HEROES Act authorizes the Secretary to “waive or
modify any statutory or regulatory provision applicable to” the federal
student loan program, 20 U.S.C. § 1098bb(a)(1) (emphasis added), an
authority that encompasses provisions applicable to the repayment of the
principal balances of loans, provided certain conditions are met.

So I don't understand what about that falls into the 3rd zone instead the 2nd where "Congressional inertia/indifference" would grant him the authority. Furthermore, Jackson's own website states presidential power in the "zone of twilight" may come down to "dependent on the events and the contemporary theory of law existing at the time" I don't think one can ignore the educational premium burden when presenting the facts of this case. Granted, my legal education consists of 2 undergrad b-law classes and taking AP Gov over half a decade ago so I defer to those who know more ab what's going on w/this.

[kia boyz '24]

If Tom Brady, Hov, Yeezy, and Diddy all got their PPP loans forgiven for their ill-advised business ventures then why the phuck don't I get something for signing the predatory ironclad student loan agreement damn near necessary to enter the professional workforce and become a homeowner before my first gray hair?

and as we all know, two wrongs make a right!