Biden v. Nebraska (2023) - Major Questions Doctrine & Student Loan Forgiveness
Title: Biden v. Nebraska (2023) - Major Questions Doctrine & Student Loan Forgiveness
Podcast series: Professor Dru Stevenson’s YouTube Course Video Page, South Texas College of Law - Houston
Host/Moderators: Professor Dru Stevenson, South Texas College of Law - Houston (https://www.stcl.edu/profile/dru-stevenson/)
Date of Publication: 08 August 2024
Summary: This video lecture for Professor Dru Stevenson’s Administrative Law course (and Statutory Interpretation-Legislation) discusses the evolving Major Questions Doctrine and how it was applied and explained in Biden v. Nebraska, 143 S.Ct. 2355 (2023), in which the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated the President's original student loan forgiveness program.
This student loan forgiveness program relied on the HEROES Act of 2003, which allows the Secretary of Education to “waive or modify” student loan provisions during a national emergency. The Court’s holding was that this emergency-related authority did not extend to cancelling hundreds of billions in student loan principal. Using the Major Questions Doctrine, the Court said that such a sweeping, economically significant action required clear, explicit congressional authorization - something the HEROES Act did not provide. In short: the decision limited how far a president can go in using statutory emergency powers to make large-scale policy changes, reaffirming that emergencies do not grant a blank check for transformative programs without clear legislative approval.
Professor Stevenson explains the Major Questions Doctrine, highlighting that it requires Congress to explicitly authorize agency actions of vast economic or political significance. The video traces the historical context of federal student loan programs, the HEROES Act of 2001, and the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on student loan policies under both the Trump and Biden administrations. Ultimately, the Supreme Court ruled that the Biden administration's broad student loan cancellation exceeded the authority granted by Congress, emphasizing the economic magnitude of the program and expressing concerns about the separation of powers. The professor concludes by discussing criticisms of the MQD, noting its subjectivity and potential for partisan application, suggesting that Congress itself has mechanisms to counter undesired agency actions.
