After hearing oral arguments on Feb. 28 about President Joe Biden's student loan relief scheme, the Supreme Court is contemplating its fate and legality.
The Supreme Court established a three-part test to determine whether a party has standing to sue: the plaintiff must have suffered an injury in fact;
There must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct brought before the court; and it must be likely, rather than speculative, that a favorable court decision will redress the injury.
Congress states that “a litigant's inability to demonstrate standing to sue may result in dismissal of his distinct claims for relief without a judgement on the merits of those claims.”
Abby Shafroth, director of the National Consumer Law Center's Student Loan Borrower Assistance Project, told Business Insider,
"If there are five votes finding that neither of the parties bringing these lawsuits have standing, then the court doesn't have any authority to decide the issue of whether the action was legal here."
According to Business Insider, Shafroth said that while the administration did not have constitutional rights to adopt the program,
the justices will "recognize our own restrictions on authority by dismissing this lawsuit for lack of Article Three standing."
If the standing question is proved, the justices will address the program's "unconstitutionality" and the HEROES Act's inability to offer student loan relief.
In his Nov. 10 judgment, Judge Mark T. Pittman of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruled that the program was an unlawful exercise of Congress.
We are not ruled by a pen-and-phone administration in our country.