Biden v. Nebraska (22-506)

argument 22-506

Biden v. Nebraska

Supreme Court of the United States 2h 2m 8 speakers 8 chapters transcribed 7 days ago official recording ↗

▲ 0

Transcript

jump: chapters · speakers · find in transcript

Transcript

Transcript generated automatically by AI and may contain errors.

What is the Supreme Court hearing in Biden v. Nebraska about?

John G. Roberts 0:00

We'll hear argument first this morning in case twenty two five oh six, Biden versus Nebraska. General Brieger?

Katherine Brieger 0:07

Mr Chief Justice, and may it please the Court. COVID nineteen is the most devastating pandemic in our nation's history and it has caused enormous disruption and economic distress. Over the past three years, millions of Americans have struggled to pay rent, utilities, food, and many have been unable to pay their debts. To head off immediate harm for student loan borrowers, two secretaries across two administrations invoked the HEROWES Act to suspend interest and payment obligations for all Americans with federally held loans. But if that forbearance ends without further relief, it's undisputed that defaults and delinquencies will surge above prepandemic levels. So Secretary Cardona again invoked the HEROS Act to provide a measure of loan forgiveness to ensure that this unprecedented pandemic does not leave borrowers worse off in relation to their student loans.

Katherine Brieger 1:03

The states ask this Court to deny that vital relief to millions of Americans, but they lack standing to seek that result. They principally assert harm to a separate legal person, Mogila, that could sue in its own name but has chosen not to do so, and the states asserted harms to their tax revenues are self inflicted and indirect. The state's bare disagreement with this policy is not the sort of concrete injury that Article three demands. On the merits, the State Save the Act doesn't authorize the Secretary to ever forgive loan principle. But the Secretary's interpretation of this text is not just a plausible reading, it's the best reading. Congress expressly authorized the Secretary to waive or modify any Title IV provision in emergencies to provide financial relief to borrowers.

Katherine Brieger 1:51

Loan forgiveness is a paradigmatic form of debt relief, and the Secretary acted within the heartland of his authority and in line with the central purpose of the Heroes Act in providing that relief here. to apply the major questions doctrine to override that clear text would deny borrowers critical relief that Congress authorized and the Secretary deemed essential. I welcome the court's questions.

Clarence Thomas 2:17

Uh General, is this a waiver or is it a modification?

Katherine Brieger 2:21

It's both a waiver and a modification, Justice Thomas. This appears at JA two sixty one. That was the decision document that the Secretary signed where he said I hereby issue waivers and modifications of multiple provisions under Title Four of the student loan program. And then that language was repeated in the Federal Register notice that actually implemented that program and constitutes the final agency action that the states are challenging here.

Clarence Thomas 2:44

Well, could you explain then? In in in in other provisions uh there is express language as a cancellation. And of course there is it here. Uh so would you take a minute to explain how a waiver or modification amounts to a waiver uh to a cancellation?

Katherine Brieger 3:03

Of course. So the Secretary identified various provisions in Title IV that govern the terms and conditions of student loans and also govern discharge and cancellation in other circumstances, as your question suggested. And I think the straightforward way to think about how the verbs map on to the secretary's action is that he waived elements of those provisions that contain eligibility requirements for discharge and cancellation that are inapplicable under this program. And then modified the provisions to contain the limitations that he had announced as part and parcel of announcing this loan forgiveness. Now you had suggested that there's no express statement in the HEROS Act to discharge loan principle, and that's true.

Katherine Brieger 3:42

But the relevant and operative language here is the provision that says the Secretary is empowered to waive or modify any Title IV provision. And so the HEROS Act isn't enumerating any of the various forms of the United States. forms of relief that have long been authorized and implemented under this statute. I don't think anything can be read into the fact that there's no express reference to particular forms of relief because Congress was trying to broadly cover the field and ensure that the Secretary had the tools to respond to the national emergency with whatever relief might be necessitated.