logo
Student Loan Update: How New Supreme Court Ruling May Impact Borrowers

Student Loan Update: How New Supreme Court Ruling May Impact Borrowers

Newsweek6 hours ago
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision allowing the Trump administration to implement widespread layoffs at the Department of Education has stirred concern among student loan borrowers and education advocates.
The high court lifted a federal injunction that had blocked the termination of approximately 1,400 employees. While the move is touted as an effort to reduce bureaucratic overhead, it's also criticized for potentially undermining support services for millions of students and borrowers.
Why It Matters
More than 40 million Americans hold student loan debt, totaling over $1.74 trillion nationwide.
With the future of the Department of Education up in the air and mass layoffs now enforced, service for borrowers, including those on income-driven repayment plans, could be disrupted.
A sign marks the entrance to the U.S. Department of Education headquarters building on June 20, 2025, in Washington, DC.
A sign marks the entrance to the U.S. Department of Education headquarters building on June 20, 2025, in Washington, DC.
J.What To Know
The Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration Monday, overturning a lower court's ban on Department of Education layoffs.
The three liberal justices, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor, dissented strongly.
Justice Sotomayor wrote, "The President must take care that the laws are faithfully executed, not set out to dismantle them... the majority rewards clear defiance of that core principle with emergency relief."
Secretary of Education Linda McMahon, however, hailed the decision as "a significant win for students and families," asserting, "the President... has the ultimate authority to make decisions about staffing levels, administrative organization, and day-to-day operations of federal agencies."
The layoffs arrive as the Department of Education contends with a significant backlog in processing income-driven repayment plans, reportedly affecting more than 1.5 million borrowers, according to a court filing.
Reduced staffing has already led to delays and communication problems, with over 40 percent of surveyed higher education institutions reporting issues related to federal student aid, according to the National Association for Student Aid Administrators report.
"They're downsizing an agency that oversees trillions of dollars in debt. If the goal is to eventually absorb the Department into another structure, fine—there's an argument to be made for that. But just slashing staff without a clear plan creates chaos," Kevin Thompson, the CEO of 9i Capital Group and the host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek.
"I would expect long hold times, miscommunication, unqualified answers, and unresolved problems. It's the perfect storm for borrower confusion."
As the administration forges ahead with the layoffs, borrowers may continue to face delayed assistance with loan management.
The Department of Education asserts it will maintain essential functions, but with less federal involvement and a pared-down workforce, the quality and timeliness of student loan servicing may suffer. Further litigation could still impact the ultimate size and authority of the agency.
"Technically, it doesn't really affect the loans themselves, which will continue to be acquired and accrue interest as usual," Alex Beene, a financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek.
"However, it could change the support some borrowers receive. As borrowers have questions about federal financial aid, new loan repayment plans, and issues with existing loans, they could find support to be lacking if these layoffs have an effect on the administrative oversight of them."
What People Are Saying
Melanie Storey, NASFAA president and CEO said in a statement: "Our students and our members need clarity and reliable support for these critical [financial aid] programs. At the end of the day, the Trump administration — all administrations — must deliver on the promise and the programs that Congress passed to support students who wish to pursue postsecondary education."
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote: "The majority apparently deems it more important to free the Government from paying employees it had no right to fire than to avert these very real harms while the litigation continues. Equity does not support such an inequitable result."
Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said in a statement: "The U.S. Department of Education will now deliver on its mandate to restore excellence in American education. We will carry out the reduction in force to promote efficiency and accountability and to ensure resources are directed where they matter most – to students, parents, and teachers.
"As we return education to the states, this Administration will continue to perform all statutory duties while empowering families and teachers by reducing education bureaucracy."
Kevin Thompson, the CEO of 9i Capital Group and the host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek: "Borrowers will be saddled with debt and promises of forgiveness that may never come. Many are already in limbo, unsure of their repayment schedules or why their payments have suddenly increased. They just want clarity. But with staff taking buyouts and operations grinding to a halt, that clarity is nowhere in sight."
What Happens Next
Many financial experts have already sounded the alarm on how the layoffs could impact student loan borrowers relying on the Department of Education to service their loans.
"For student loan borrowers, specifically, this will mean more delays and poorer service in a program that already has service issues," Drew Powers, the founder of Illinois-based Powers Financial Group, told Newsweek. "The end result is nothing but harm to our current students."
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump expected to push for 401(k) private assets: Pros & cons
Trump expected to push for 401(k) private assets: Pros & cons

Yahoo

time15 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump expected to push for 401(k) private assets: Pros & cons

US President Trump is expected to sign an executive order that would make it easier to own private assets in a retirement account. Yahoo Finance Senior Columnist Kerry Hannon breaks down what investors need to know. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Domination Overtime here. President Trump gearing up to sign an executive order to open retirement plans to private markets, senior columnist, Carrie Hannon is here with more, Carrie. Uh yes, um, the president is expected to sign uh an executive order directing the so the Securities and Exchange Commission to give guidance to mutual fund administrator for to four one K plan specifically administrators of how to add private assets into their retirement account offerings. And this is sort of a big deal. The fact is private assets have been a it's not illegal to have them in retirement accounts as it is. And pension funds have done this for decades. But the issue is most plan administrators don't really understand how to fold those into their four one K plan offerings. And there are some really good things about this. So we'll start with the pro stuff. If you were to put these this can be a variety of assets, right? It can be hedge funds, it can be private, um, uh, real estate things, infrastructure, all variety of things that most people don't quite get a grip on and to get into those assets you needed to have pretty high net worth or a minimum, the minimum requirement invest was fairly high. So the point is that this could actually help people give them an extra boost in their retirement accounts. It adds diversification to these retirement accounts. And when you think about people are living longer, Social Security shortfalls that people are worried about, cost of living is going up. So for people who are investing for the long run, and Larry Fink at BlackRock said over a 40 year period, these private assets could, you know, return 15% to someone. So this is rather significant if you look at it that way. But if you turn the corner and look the other way, if it's somebody who is not investing for the long term, they need to get the money out in a shorter time frame. These tend to be fairly illiquid, the fees can be high, and and there's a concern that people don't really understand what they are. And I'll just to finalize that by saying, you know, most people don't have a clue what they're investing in anyway. Um, most employers automatically put their their employees in target date funds which are plain vanilla index funds and people set them and forget them. So it will take a lot of education for people to understand and I'm a big fan of people understanding what they're investing in, but it's not all a negative thing. These can have some real good boost ultimately over the long run. If someone get a small percentage, I would say you wouldn't want more than 15% of your portfolio, your retirement savings in private assets. All right, Lou, get you in here. So let's say Lou, I'm private equity now Lou, I'm Blackstone, I'm KKR. And I say to you Lou, you know, all I'm trying to do Lou, I'm just trying to give people more options, I'm trying to give them more choices, right? And more diversification. What's wrong with, you know, maybe a chance to have a a meteor return? What's wrong with that? Yeah, I'll I'll play this game. I'm with Carrie, there's a lot of cons, but if you're BlackRock and KKR, I know this, pension funds and endowments aren't allocating as much money to you, and there's a huge pot at the end of the rainbow of about 9 to 12 trillion dollars in four one K accounts that seems really appealing to sell these highly liquid, uh not transparent, high feed products that could or could not outperform the S&P 500. I'm with Carrie, education is paramount. 43% of people only consider themselves financially literate based on our latest Finra study. That's a lot of people we got to educate before we give them access to things that are really difficult to understand. And Carrie, you know, Lou makes very good points as always. What would the private equity guys say Carrie? Would they say listen, you know what? Finance changes, investing changes, public markets change, and you got to change with it and so does your portfolio. Well, you know what I got to say? These are coming no matter what. So I think we can talk all we want, but I think this is this is definitely something that is coming down the road. Yes, things do change, but um, you know, the old 60 40 portfolio, which most retirement investors have been encouraged to have over the years, mixture of stocks and bonds, has done pretty well over time. But yes, we are in new times, but I just, you know, I think it's good to offer some extra uh oomph to people if that's possible, but it's it's a really tricky thing because this is money that people are socking away to really for their futures and and if they do, we see people pulling money out of their retirement accounts right now, you know, taking uh early early distributions, and this would be not a good situation. Carrie, great to see you as always. Enjoy the weekend. You too. Related Videos Q2 earnings trends to watch: Tariff mentions, AI, and outlooks Metafide CEO: Stablecoin Law "Great Thing for Market" Huntington Bank CFO: Q2 Earnings Were "Phenomenal" Why Netflix might want to 'pivot' to take on YouTube Sign in to access your portfolio

Fed's Goolsbee defends Powell as 'totally honorable guy' amid White House attacks
Fed's Goolsbee defends Powell as 'totally honorable guy' amid White House attacks

Yahoo

time15 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Fed's Goolsbee defends Powell as 'totally honorable guy' amid White House attacks

Chicago Federal Reserve president Austan Goolsbee on Friday expressed support for Jerome Powell and central bank independence when asked about pressure being applied by President Trump, saying the Fed chair is a 'totally honorable guy.' 'I as well as a virtual unanimity of economists believe that central bank independence from political interference is absolutely critical to the operation of the Fed and of the economy,' Goolsbee said in an interview with Yahoo Finance. 'If you just look at places where they do not have independence for the central bank inflation is higher, growth is worse, unemployment and the job market do worse, and everyone knows that.' He added that "it pains me to hear people actively discussing whether the central bank should be independent. There's nothing good can come of discussion like that." His response follows an intense period of pressure from Trump and other White House officials frustrated with Powell's wait-and-see approach to interest rates and his cautionary comments on the possibility of persistent inflation from Trump's tariffs. Trump's allies in recent weeks used another tactic to turn up the pressure on Powell: They invoked a $2.5 billion renovation of the Fed's headquarters as a way to question the chair's management of the institution and whether he told Congress the truth about the project. This past week Trump denied that he was planning to fire Powell imminently, but also left the door open to that possibility. Goolsbee said he is a "big admirer" of Powell and considers him a "totally honorable guy" as well as a "first ballot hall of famer" without addressing any of specific criticism coming from the White House. Goolsbee on Friday also echoed Powell's caution on cutting interest rates, saying that 'we don't know until we know' how inflation will be affected by the 'drip drip' of tariff announcements. Powell has been arguing that more time is needed to know if any of Trump's tariffs push inflation higher this summer. Goolsbee said he is seeing tariffs push up prices on goods, but not spilling over into prices for services, saying that still keeps him in a 'wait and see' mode. A rolling, staggered implementation of tariffs, he noted, makes it more difficult to argue the impact of tariffs will be just be a one-time increase in prices. 'Anything that makes it harder to figure out if we are on a path back to 2% inflation is extending the timetable of when the rate cuts can happen,' said Goolsbee. He declined to say whether he sees rate cuts in the fall months of this year, noting that if there are multiple more months of benign readings on inflation he would feel more comfortable cutting. But if he started to see a ramp up in prices with higher tariff rates, then he said he would have to assess the impact. 'Rates can come down, but we don't know if we're on the path to 2% inflation because we don't know on tariffs on energy prices and geopolitics,' said Goolsbee. 'We're going to have to wait and see what what's happening in the data.' Fed governor Christopher Waller said Thursday he believes the central bank should cut rates at the next policy meeting on July 29-20, as he again argued that any inflation from tariffs would be temporary, underscoring a divide within the central bank. He also hinted he may dissent at the July meeting if his colleagues decide to hold rates steady, which is what investors expect will happen. Odds priced in by traders for a rate cut in September only sit at nearly 60%. Click here for in-depth analysis of the latest stock market news and events moving stock prices Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Colbert's Trump Joke May Have Led To Show Cancelation
Colbert's Trump Joke May Have Led To Show Cancelation

Buzz Feed

time16 minutes ago

  • Buzz Feed

Colbert's Trump Joke May Have Led To Show Cancelation

CBS stunned fans of The Late Show on Thursday after it announced that it would cancel the Stephen Colbert -led program, a move that renewed attention to a recent jab that the host made toward the network's parent company over its heavily panned $16 million settlement with President Donald Trump. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) shared a clip from Colbert's Monday monologue on social media where he slammed Paramount Global for settling a lawsuit with Trump, who claimed that a 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris was deceptively edited to aid her chances of winning the election. That settlement notably arrived as Paramount looks to merge with Skydance Media in a multibillion-dollar deal, one that requires approval from the Trump administration to proceed. 'As someone who has always been a proud employee of this network, I am offended. I don't know if anything — anything — will repair my trust in this company,' Colbert quipped. 'But, just taking a stab at it, I'd say $16 million would help.' The host proceeded to point out that Paramount once described the lawsuit as 'completely without merit' before joking that the company put a price tag on its 'dignity' and referred to the settlement as a 'big fat bribe.' Colbert, a frequent Trump critic, previously made fun of Paramount back in May amid reports that the company was ready to settle the lawsuit. Warren echoed Colbert's sentiment as she wrote on X that the deal 'looks like bribery' and America 'deserves to know if his show was canceled for political reasons.' CBS canceled Colbert's show just THREE DAYS after Colbert called out CBS parent company Paramount for its $16M settlement with Trump – a deal that looks like bribery. America deserves to know if his show was canceled for political reasons. Watch and share his message. — Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) July 18, 2025 CBS In May, Warren, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and other lawmakers sent a letter to Paramount Global chair Shari Redstone warning her not to make a 'grave mistake' by settling the lawsuit. At the time, Sanders — when asked by Colbert about the letter to his 'ultimate boss' — quipped that it could be the host's 'last show' before stressing that such a deal could set a dangerous precedent for other media companies. Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who is set to appear on Thursday's episode of 'The Late Show,' also criticized CBS' move.'If Paramount and CBS ended the Late Show for political reasons, the public deserves to know. And deserves better,' Schiff wrote on X. Just finished taping with Stephen Colbert who announced his show was cancelled. If Paramount and CBS ended the Late Show for political reasons, the public deserves to know. And deserves better. — Adam Schiff (@SenAdamSchiff) July 17, 2025 Other critics alleged that the move by CBS was politically motivated, although the network claims it was ' purely a financial decision ': CBS sells out…again. — Martin Heinrich (@SenatorHeinrich) July 18, 2025 Stephen Colbert's show was canceled three days after he called out Paramount, CBS's parent company, for folding to Trump with a $16M settlement for a lawsuit that even they called 'without merit." People deserve to know if this is a politically motivated attack on free speech. — Rep. Pramila Jayapal (@RepJayapal) July 18, 2025 Colbert to be canceled May 2026. A direct result of Paramount paying Trump 60 million. — Steve Martin (@UnrealBluegrass) July 18, 2025 Scott Kowalchyk/CBS via Getty Images 'This is purely a financial decision against a challenging backdrop in late night,' top CBS executives said in a statement announcing the news. 'It is not related in any way to the show's performance, content or other matters happening at Paramount.' — Bill Simmons (@BillSimmons) July 18, 2025 Paramount Colbert has the highest ratings of any late night host. "Financial reasons" my ass. This is political. — Charlotte Clymer 🇺🇦 (@cmclymer) July 18, 2025 On the one hand: There *is* an economic rationale for this. Late night shows aren't cheap (w/ giant talent salaries) and they don't deliver traditional strong ratings anymore. Other hand: I don't believe them. It's not the money in this case. — Michael Socolow (@MichaelSocolow) July 17, 2025 Scott Kowalchyk/CBS via Getty Images If Donald Trump is going to get Stephen Colbert canceled, Stephen Colbert should talk about Donald Trump & Jeffrey Epstein every night on his show until it's off the air. — Evan (@daviddunn177) July 18, 2025 Stephen Colbert doesn't need CBS anyway. Wherever he ends up, people are going to watch him even harder now. All CBS did was solidify the fact that they'll be know until the end of time as just another spineless corporation that couldn't do the right thing. — Karly Kingsley (@karlykingsley) July 18, 2025

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store