Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump · ¶77

Finally, dissenting in Biden v. Nebraska, 600 U. S. 477 (2023), my colleagues took up a statute permitting the Secretary of Education to “waive or modify any statutory or regulatory provision applying to [a federal] student-loan program” during a national emergency. Id., at 533 (opinion of Kagan, J., joined by Sotomayor and Jackson, JJ.) (internal quotation marks omitted). They said that language allowed the Secretary to cancel $430 billion in federal student-loan debt because of COVID–19. See ibid.; id., at 501 (majority opinion). Once again, they argued that the statutory terms were “broad,” “expansive,” “capacious,” and designed to afford the Secretary a “poten[t]” power to respond to “national emergencies” that were “major in scope.” Id., at 533–542 (Kagan, J., dissenting).

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.