What’s the problem here? “Money for businesses” (like the PPP loans) was passed in Congress, so that was following the Constitution. It was not a unilateral decision by Joe Biden without Constitutional authority, like the student debt move. Weingarten knows that she’s just being dishonest. If this was truly important to the Democrats, why didn’t they try to get it passed in Congress when they controlled both chambers? //

those protesters may owe a lot on their educations — which debt they voluntarily incurred — but they apparently didn’t learn that the SCOTUS isn’t supposed to be influenced by their protest. Indeed, their protest to try to influence the Court raises again the question of 18 U.S.C. § 1507, the provision that says you shouldn’t have “pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States” to try to influence any judge in the course of his/her duty. The Court is supposed to decide, based solely on the Constitution, not be pressured by screaming mobs. //

In final nutty remarks on the subject, I give you Democratic Socialist Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) as he inveighs the Court to “follow the law.” SCOTUS is following the law — the Constitution. There is no law supporting what Joe Biden did here. The government has no obligation to use our tax dollars to pay off your debt.