3 ms·

the problem is that there is already a system for loan forgiveness / student redress. its called the court system if there is fault, that's the way to adjudic

the problem is that there is already a system for loan forgiveness / student redress. its called the court system if there is fault, that's the way to adjudicate. The extent that the govt is making that more difficult (not encouraging class action due to no regulation in place), then that should be done . Everything else is risky precedent

dragonwriter 6y ago
> the problem is that there is already a system for loan forgiveness / student redress. This is the system established by law for student loan forgiveness; it was unilaterally hamstrung administratively by the Trump Administration.
- IG_Semmelweiss 6y ago
  are you talking about bankruptcy ? If yes, that was Bush's doing. He kneecapped it, not Trump
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > are you talking about bankruptcy ? No, I'm talking about the process in this article.
    - IG_Semmelweiss 6y ago
      Im not sure who's right here, you said there was a law to adjudicate student forgiveness, but the article states that congress never passed any rule reversing executive action on the matter. So, if executive action by trump's cabinet was responsible for eliminating the existing process, it follows that prior executive process brought forgiveness to life previously. A process is not a law. My point is that we already have laws to adjudicate tort / fraud claims. We don't need another (based on no law) to have unelected political operators to choose which fraud claims are to be heard, and which will not. Equality is under the law. Not under process.
      - dragonwriter 6y ago
        > Im not sure who's right here, you said there was a law to adjudicate student forgiveness, but the article states that congress never passed any rule reversing executive action on the matter. The executive action didn't technically erase the legal process, it just created administrative barriers to recovery and limited the amount of recovery to less than the full amount at issue even where all the hoops it erected were jumped through. That borrower defense to repayment is an existing legal process has never been in dispute. > So, if executive action by trump's cabinet was responsible for eliminating the existing process It was not, the process wasn't eliminated it was just made less effective.

dragonwriter 6y ago

> the problem is that there is already a system for loan forgiveness / student redress. This is the system established by law for student loan forgiveness; it was unilaterally hamstrung administratively by the Trump Administration.

IG_Semmelweiss 6y ago
are you talking about bankruptcy ? If yes, that was Bush's doing. He kneecapped it, not Trump
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > are you talking about bankruptcy ? No, I'm talking about the process in this article.
  - IG_Semmelweiss 6y ago
    Im not sure who's right here, you said there was a law to adjudicate student forgiveness, but the article states that congress never passed any rule reversing executive action on the matter. So, if executive action by trump's cabinet was responsible for eliminating the existing process, it follows that prior executive process brought forgiveness to life previously. A process is not a law. My point is that we already have laws to adjudicate tort / fraud claims. We don't need another (based on no law) to have unelected political operators to choose which fraud claims are to be heard, and which will not. Equality is under the law. Not under process.
    - dragonwriter 6y ago
      > Im not sure who's right here, you said there was a law to adjudicate student forgiveness, but the article states that congress never passed any rule reversing executive action on the matter. The executive action didn't technically erase the legal process, it just created administrative barriers to recovery and limited the amount of recovery to less than the full amount at issue even where all the hoops it erected were jumped through. That borrower defense to repayment is an existing legal process has never been in dispute. > So, if executive action by trump's cabinet was responsible for eliminating the existing process It was not, the process wasn't eliminated it was just made less effective.