matt-jokerfied

  • solaranus
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    deleted by creator

    • jabrd [he/him]
      ·
      1 year ago

      The precedence set is kind of insane. The government is now no longer able to act in a way that could *possibly cost a private firm cash. Literally what democracy

      • solaranus
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        deleted by creator

      • Averagemaoist [none/use name]
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not really. It’s not saying the government can’t cancel student loans, it’s saying the president can’t. Congress has always had control of spending and this just reaffirms that.

        It sucks but it’s very expected. Canceling loans always was going to need democrats controlling the senate, house and presidency.

        • solaranus
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          deleted by creator

        • anoncpc [comrade/them]
          ·
          1 year ago

          Then the old coot should did it when they had all 3 branch of congress. What a scammer

        • Rod_Blagojevic [none/use name]
          ·
          1 year ago

          If the chief executive stopped collecting debts there's nothing anyone could do about it. Am I correct? It would be up to the next president to decide if they want to be the assholes. We already have policy options constrained by rightwingers who just say they won't implement or enforce policies they don't like. It would be cool if someone did that for workers.

      • mkultrawide [any]
        ·
        1 year ago

        This court has already set the precedent that precedent doesn't matter.

    • SerLava [he/him]
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also it turns out mohela would gain money from this, not lose money. The plaintiffs simply lied

      • solaranus
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        deleted by creator