WASHINGTON 鈥� A sharply divided on Friday effectively killed President Joe Biden鈥檚 $400 billion plan to for millions of Americans. 鈥淭his fight is not over,鈥� he said.
The 6-3 decision, with conservative justices in the majority, said the with the plan, and it leaves borrowers on the hook for repayments that are expected to resume in the fall.
The court held that the administration needed Congress' endorsement before undertaking so costly a program. The majority rejected arguments that a bipartisan 2003 law dealing with national emergencies, known as the HEROES Act, gave Biden the power he claimed.
Biden, who once doubted his own authority to offer student loan forgiveness, said later Friday he would push ahead with while blaming Republican 鈥渉ypocrisy鈥� for the decision that wiped out his original effort.
The president said he would work under the authority of the Higher Education Act to begin a new program designed to ease borrowers鈥� threat of default if they fall behind over the next year.
READ MORE: Read the Supreme Court ruling striking down Biden's student loan relief program
The Supreme Court ruling was blunt in rejecting Biden's first plan.
鈥淪ix States sued, arguing that the HEROES Act does not authorize the loan cancellation plan. We agree,鈥� Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court.
Justice Elena Kagan, wrote in a dissent, joined by the court鈥檚 two other liberals, that the majority of the court 鈥渙verrides the combined judgment of the Legislative and Executive Branches, with the consequence of eliminating loan forgiveness for 43 million Americans.鈥� Kagan read a summary of her dissent in court to emphasize her disagreement.
Roberts, perhaps anticipating negative public reaction and aware of , added an unusual coda to his opinion, cautioning that the liberals' dissent should not be mistaken for disparagement of the court itself. 鈥滻t is important that the public not be misled either. Any such misperception would be harmful to this institution and our country," the chief justice wrote.
In South Florida, federal and state legislators mostly condemned the high court's ruling.
U.S. Rep. Frederica Wilson, a Democrat from South Florida, called it 鈥渄eeply disappointing.鈥�
Said Wilson: 鈥淭his decision perpetuates inequality and lays bare the double standard of economic assistance in this country: Banks get billions in bailouts while debt-ridden students get nothing.鈥�
State Sen. Shevrin Jones, a Democrat from Miami Gardens, said in a statement that the ruling will mean 鈥渕illions of Americans will be less economically secure, less free, and less able to access opportunities this country ought to afford everyone, regardless of circumstances.鈥�
Democratic U.S. Rep. Maxwell Frost, of Orlando, who is the first Gen Z member of Congress, lashed out at the high court鈥檚 conservative majority.
鈥淥nce again, today the conservative-leaning Supreme Court has gotten it wrong and actively chosen to discriminate against working Americans and student borrowers,鈥� he said.
He said the Biden administration should use the 鈥渕any tools at their disposal to help borrowers."
Florida Republican U.S. Sen. Rick Scott applauded the court鈥檚 ruling, saying it 鈥渟imply reflects common sense and an accurate reading of the Constitution 鈥� two things that Joe Biden is incapable of.鈥�
鈥淗ardworking Americans like plumbers and welders should not subsidize the law school bills of elite lawyers," said Scott. "We all know it.鈥�
The forgiveness program would have canceled $10,000 in student loan debt for those making less than $125,000 or households with less than $250,000 in income. Pell Grant recipients, who typically demonstrate more financial need, would have had an additional $10,000 in debt forgiven.
Twenty-six million people had applied for relief and 43 million would have been eligible, the administration said. The cost was estimated at $400 billion over 30 years.
港澳天下彩news staff contributed to this story.
