Yes, the 8th Circuit made that ruling. No one is disputing that. YOU asserted that (paraphrasing) “they had no choice to issue a stay because it was filed on a Friday.”
Is there some portion of the Rules of the Court that states they must grant a stay in cases that are filed on the weekend that the rest of us aren’t privy to?
Great. And for that, millions of Americans should be saddled with back-breaking poverty. Bravo. golf clap
Not the rest of us - only you are arguing here.
If you wish to stop something from happening, you file a lawsuit to stop it from happening. Since the distributions were to start this past weekend (cited twice), to allow the distributions to start would… in theory… harm the persons bringing suit. So, in this situation, a situation gamed by the Evils, an administrative stay was granted.
I literally do not know why you are arguing this point because even the news sources which lie are not lying about this particular fact:
I would also like to note that you highlighted the word “must” as if it was something that I said. It was not.
The liberals are upset with you because you showed that their idol has feet of clay. They’ve attacked Trump for so long for mental decline that they dare not admit even the barest possibility that a 79-year-old MIGHT be not as sharp as he used to be.
College education pay to play.
House of cards.
Forbes article
You’re right. You said, “they had no choice”, and “had to be granted.” I fail to see a substantive difference between those phrases and “must”.
It’s actually the moral decline that we complain most about with Trump.
Nah, that’s not it. Now, admittedly, Trump got a bit of laughter out of us when he would make claims about being a “very stable genious” or brag about passing a basic cognitive test, but that wasn’t really the problem that we had with him.
Not sure how you would come to the conclusion that you have here.
Yep! Who cares if Biden munched his words - that’s just typical distraction strategy here, to take focus off what should be an embarrassing development for Republicans on the campaign trail right now. “Hey, look over there, not at this thing, which is damaging to my campaign!”
From the article @chela shared:
In the last week, 22 million Americans have applied for loan forgiveness, President Joe Biden announced Friday.
A few hours later, acting on a request from Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, and South Carolina, an appeals court ordered the government to stop processing applications. Biden blamed “MAGA Republicans” for “doing everything they can to deny this relief, even to their own constituents,” and vowed not to let “them get away with it.”
So… last Friday the 8th Circuit Court of appeals stayed the student loan forgiveness program. They required the government to file a response by Oct 24, and the Red States trying to shut it down to reply to that by Oct 25.
I’ve seen almost nothing about these filings. I did find one MeidasTouch video that summarizes then, but no mainstream news articles. Tons of stuff about the stay, but very little follow up.
Are these kind of things publicly available? I think they are, but I have no idea where to get them.
Anyone have any idea?
Here’s that Meidas Touch video if anyone is interested:
Right again. Sometimes it’s tiring.
She didn’t even bother to refer this embarrassing shit to the full court.
But the 8th circuit is still just sitting on those briefs they’ve had since October 25th. Is there some time limit that they have to follow or can they just silently sit on it forever? Are they waiting until after the election to help Republican chances? Why isn’t anybody talking about this? I feel like Democrats should be bringing it up all the time? “This is what happens when you let Republicans pack the courts.” Something like that.
[Gift link]
A federal judge in Texas on Thursday struck down President Biden’s student loan forgiveness program, delivering a victory to a conservative advocacy group that sued to halt the plan.
This is a separate lawsuit from the 8th Circuit one. The judge decided not to worry about standing, he just decided to rule anyway.
The judge did address standing in the ruling. I would quote the relevant parts, but people tend not to read court opinions, only secondhand accounts of what someone else thinks that the ruling means.
Quoted so we’d have a secondhand account of what someone else thinks that the ruling means.
Did you read the judge’s ruling vis-à-vis standing? Or just what the Student Borrowers Protection Center is claiming?
Am I inferring that your secondhand account shouldn’t be relied on?
How should I know what you are inferring?
In other words, you got nothing.