Latest news with #EighthCircuitCourt
Daily Mail
5 days ago
- Business
- Daily Mail
Millions of student loan borrowers to be hit with crippling interest charges as Trump ends Biden-era pause
The student loan balances for roughly eight million Americans are about to balloon now that the Department of Education plans to restart interest charges by August 1. This action affects the 7.7 million borrowers who are enrolled in the Biden-era Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE) Plan, a program that shrunk payments to $0 a month for people under a certain income threshold. The interest charges for SAVE borrowers will kick in at the start of next month, though they won't have to resume making payments. The Education Department said the primary reason it restarted interest was because it sought to comply with a federal court injunction from July 2024 that blocked the full implementation of the SAVE plan. The injunction from the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals is what placed borrowers in an indefinite period of forbearance, which postpones their payments. That was done so the federal government could figure out how to transition millions of people out of the program, later ruled to be illegal by the same court in February 2024. 'For years, the Biden Administration used so-called "loan forgiveness" promises to win votes, but federal courts repeatedly ruled that those actions were unlawful,' Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. 'Since day one of the Trump Administration, we've focused on strengthening the student loan portfolio and simplifying repayment to better serve borrowers,' she added. Guidance from the Education Department in January estimated that SAVE plan enrollees won't have to actually start paying servicers until December 2025. Mike Pierce, the executive director of the Student Borrower Protection Center, called the policy pivot by the Trump administration a 'betrayal' and attacked McMahon. 'Instead of fixing the broken student loan system, Secretary McMahon is choosing to drown millions of people in unnecessary interest charges and blaming unrelated court cases for her own mismanagement,' Pierce told ABC News in a statement. The Student Borrower Protection Center's mission is to reduce the federal student debt burden on Americans, which has swelled to over $1.6 trillion. Student debt is more difficult to get rid of than other types of debt, as it cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. More than a decade before championing student loan forgiveness as president, Joe Biden as a senator voted for a 2005 law that made it even harder for Americans to wipe out their education loans through the bankruptcy process. Pierce said the Trump administration's latest move, though framed as a way to end the debt crisis, will only exacerbate the problem. 'Every day we hear from borrowers waiting on hold with their servicer for hours, begging the government to let them out of this forbearance and help them get back on track -- instead McMahon is choosing to jack up the cost of their student debt without giving them a way out,' he said. 'These are teachers, nurses and retail workers who trusted the government's word, only to get sucker-punched by bills that will now cost them hundreds more every month,' Pierce added. The SAVE plan that is now being wound down was introduced by Biden in February 2024 after the Supreme Court ruled that his prior student loan forgiveness plan was unconstitutional. That program would have canceled $20,000 in loans for Pell Grant recipients and $10,000 for non Pell-Grant recipients. Forgiveness also would have only been reserved for people making less than $125,000 per year. The SAVE plan still aimed to cancel debt, though enrolled borrowers were required to make consistent payments for a maximum of 25 years to get their loan slate wiped clean, regardless of the amount borrowed. The interest restart for SAVE borrowers comes less than a week after President Donald Trump signed the Big Beautiful Bill into law. That law, Trump's signature domestic policy agenda for his second term, includes a provision that radically reduces the number of student loan repayment plans borrowers can use. Before the law's passage, there were about 12 different programs to choose from. Now there are just two: a standard repayment plan and a new income-driven repayment plan called Repayment Assistance Plan (RAP). Under RAP, borrowers' monthly payments will be set as a share of their income. For instance, if someone makes between $10,000 and $20,000, they would be obligated to pay 1 percent of that toward their loans. At the higher end of the scale people with incomes of $100,000 or more would have to pay 10 percent. In May, economist Jason Delisle, a nonresident senior fellow at the Urban Institute, put together his best estimate of what a single-person household would end up paying every month. Delisle compared the Big Beautiful Bill's approach to the income-based repayment plan passed under former President Barack Obama. People making $30,000 all the way up to $70,000 would actually pay less each month under the GOP plan, according to Delisle. The only groups who would have to pay more are those bring in no income, those who make $20,000 a year and people who earn upwards of $100,000. The standard repayment plan under the Big Beautiful Bill does not take income into account, rather it sets fixed monthly payments based on the size of the loan balance. Larger balances are also given longer time periods to pay off. For example, a collection of federal student loans worth less than $25,000 can be paid off in 10 years, while a loans exceeding $100,000 can be paid over a period of 25 years, according to the text of the law. Students who took out loans before July 1, 2026, will still have access to the myriad of repayment plans. The new changes Republicans passed will only affect people who take out loans after that date.
Yahoo
21-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Lawsuit filed by 17 states against abortion accommodations in the workplace can proceed
A lawsuit filed by 17 states challenging federal rules entitling workers to time off and other accommodations for abortions may proceed, a federal appeals court ruled. The Eighth Circuit Court's decision on Thursday reverses Eastern District of Arkansas U.S. District Judge D.P. Marshall, Jr.'s dismissal of the case in June after he found that the states lacked standing to sue. Eighth Circuit Chief Judge Steven M. Colloton, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush in 2003, wrote in Thursday's opinion that the states do have standing since they are subject to the federal rules. Led by Republican state attorneys general in Tennessee and Arkansas, the 17 states sued the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in April challenging its rules on how to implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, a 2022 bipartisan law requiring employers to make 'reasonable accommodations' for pregnant or postpartum employees. See for yourself — The Yodel is the go-to source for daily news, entertainment and feel-good stories. By signing up, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy. In addition to more routine pregnancy workplace accommodations like time off for prenatal appointments, more bathroom breaks, or permission to carry snacks, the rules say that workers can ask for time off to obtain an abortion and recover from the procedure. 'The Biden-era EEOC's attempt to turn a good law into an ideological weapon to force broad elective abortion accommodations is illegal," Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti said in an emailed statement. 'The EEOC's unlawful regulations undermine the constitutional authority of the people's elected representatives and we are vindicated by the Court's decision to let our suit proceed.' The lawsuit — joined by state attorneys in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah and West Virginia — is one of several legal challenges to the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act rules. One case in Texas seeks to overturn the law in its entirety. The Eighth Circuit Court's decision to revive the case comes after a 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling opened the door to state abortion bans, and as bills to track and charge women who get abortions with murder have gotten attention in Missouri, North Dakota and Oklahoma state legislatures this month. The EEOC, which enforces U.S. anti-discrimination laws, during former President Joe Biden's administration published regulations that provide guidance for employers and workers on how to implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. In them, the agency said that workers can ask for time off to obtain an abortion and recover from the procedure, along with pregnancy-related medical conditions like miscarriage, stillbirth and lactation. Citing numerous court rulings, the EEOC in its regulations said it was conforming to decades of legal precedent establishing that pregnancy-related discrimination laws include abortion. But many Republican lawmakers, including Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, who co-sponsored the bill, were furious when the EEOC stated that the law covered abortions. Both Republican EEOC commissioners voted against the rules at the time. A spokesperson for the EEOC said the agency will 'refrain from discussing litigation' but referred The Associated Press to Acting Chair Andrea Lucas' position on the Commission's PWFA regulations, which she voted against. 'I support elements of the final rule. However, I am unable to approve it because it purports to broaden the scope of the statute in ways that, in my view, cannot reasonably be reconciled with the text,' she wrote in a statement at the time explaining her decision to vote against the rules. The EEOC has undergone significant change since President Donald Trump took office last month. After naming Lucas, a Republican, as acting chair, Trump fired two Democratic commissioners of the five-member bipartisan EEOC before their terms expired in an unprecedented move. Had the commissioners been allowed to carry out their terms, the EEOC would have had a Democratic majority well into Trump's term. The administration also dismissed Karla Gilbride as the EEOC's general counsel, replacing her with Andrew Rogers as acting counsel. Without a quorum, the EEOC cannot rescind its own rules, although Lucas in the statement said she intends for the EEOC to reconsider portions of the rules she believes are unsupported by law once a quorum is re-established. The Department of Justice represents the EEOC in court, and under Trump, it remains to be seen whether it will continue to fight the states' lawsuit. Inimai Chettiar, president of advocacy group A Better Balance, which spearheaded a decade-long campaign for the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and filed an amicus brief in support of the EEOC alongside National Women's Law Center, American Civil Liberties Union, and several more organizations, on Thursday called the Eighth Circuit Court's decision 'an attack on reproductive choice." 'Workers in need of an abortion should not be discriminated against or forced off the job because of a need for vital health care," she said. With Lucas' stated intention to alter the PWFA rules, the existing lawsuits against them, the EEOC firings and the DOJ changing hands under the new presidential administration, 'things are moving pretty fast and we're very concerned about what's going to happen to the PWFA regulations specifically that cover abortion,' Chettiar said. She emphasized that for the vast majority of Americans, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act is still the law of the land, and the EEOC's regulations remain in effect. 'This law is still on the books, the regulation is still on the books. Women still have access to all of these accommodations and they can call our free legal helpline if they need more clarification,' she said. _____ The Associated Press' women in the workforce and state government coverage receives financial support from Pivotal Ventures. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
The Hill
21-02-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Lawsuit filed by 17 states against abortion accommodations in the workplace can proceed
A lawsuit filed by 17 states challenging federal rules entitling workers to time off and other accommodations for abortions may proceed, a federal appeals court ruled. The Eighth Circuit Court's decision on Thursday reverses Eastern District of Arkansas U.S. District Judge D.P. Marshall, Jr.'s dismissal of the case in June after he found that the states lacked standing to sue. Eighth Circuit Chief Judge Steven M. Colloton, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush in 2003, wrote in Thursday's opinion that the states do have standing since they are subject to the federal rules. Led by Republican state attorneys general in Tennessee and Arkansas, the 17 states sued the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in April challenging its rules on how to implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, a 2022 bipartisan law requiring employers to make 'reasonable accommodations' for pregnant or postpartum employees. In addition to more routine pregnancy workplace accommodations like time off for prenatal appointments, more bathroom breaks, or permission to carry snacks, the rules say that workers can ask for time off to obtain an abortion and recover from the procedure. 'The Biden-era EEOC's attempt to turn a good law into an ideological weapon to force broad elective abortion accommodations is illegal,' Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti said in an emailed statement. 'The EEOC's unlawful regulations undermine the constitutional authority of the people's elected representatives and we are vindicated by the Court's decision to let our suit proceed.' The lawsuit — joined by state attorneys in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah and West Virginia — is one of several legal challenges to the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act rules. One case in Texas seeks to overturn the law in its entirety. The Eighth Circuit Court's decision to revive the case comes after a 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling opened the door to state abortion bans, and as bills to track and charge women who get abortions with murder have gotten attention in Missouri, North Dakota and Oklahoma state legislatures this month. The EEOC, which enforces U.S. anti-discrimination laws, during former President Joe Biden's administration published regulations that provide guidance for employers and workers on how to implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. In them, the agency said that workers can ask for time off to obtain an abortion and recover from the procedure, along with pregnancy-related medical conditions like miscarriage, stillbirth and lactation. Citing numerous court rulings, the EEOC in its regulations said it was conforming to decades of legal precedent establishing that pregnancy-related discrimination laws include abortion. But many Republican lawmakers, including Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, who co-sponsored the bill, were furious when the EEOC stated that the law covered abortions. Both Republican EEOC commissioners voted against the rules at the time. A spokesperson for the EEOC said the agency will 'refrain from discussing litigation' but referred The Associated Press to Acting Chair Andrea Lucas' position on the Commission's PWFA regulations, which she voted against. 'I support elements of the final rule. However, I am unable to approve it because it purports to broaden the scope of the statute in ways that, in my view, cannot reasonably be reconciled with the text,' she wrote in a statement at the time explaining her decision to vote against the rules. The EEOC has undergone significant change since President Donald Trump took office last month. After naming Lucas, a Republican, as acting chair, Trump fired two Democratic commissioners of the five-member bipartisan EEOC before their terms expired in an unprecedented move. Had the commissioners been allowed to carry out their terms, the EEOC would have had a Democratic majority well into Trump's term. The administration also dismissed Karla Gilbride as the EEOC's general counsel, replacing her with Andrew Rogers as acting counsel. Without a quorum, the EEOC cannot rescind its own rules, although Lucas in the statement said she intends for the EEOC to reconsider portions of the rules she believes are unsupported by law once a quorum is re-established. The Department of Justice represents the EEOC in court, and under Trump, it remains to be seen whether it will continue to fight the states' lawsuit. Inimai Chettiar, president of advocacy group A Better Balance, which spearheaded a decade-long campaign for the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and filed an amicus brief in support of the EEOC alongside National Women's Law Center, American Civil Liberties Union, and several more organizations, on Thursday called the Eighth Circuit Court's decision 'an attack on reproductive choice.' 'Workers in need of an abortion should not be discriminated against or forced off the job because of a need for vital health care,' she said. With Lucas' stated intention to alter the PWFA rules, the existing lawsuits against them, the EEOC firings and the DOJ changing hands under the new presidential administration, 'things are moving pretty fast and we're very concerned about what's going to happen to the PWFA regulations specifically that cover abortion,' Chettiar said. She emphasized that for the vast majority of Americans, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act is still the law of the land, and the EEOC's regulations remain in effect. 'This law is still on the books, the regulation is still on the books. Women still have access to all of these accommodations and they can call our free legal helpline if they need more clarification,' she said. _____ The Associated Press' women in the workforce and state government coverage receives financial support from Pivotal Ventures. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
Associated Press
21-02-2025
- Politics
- Associated Press
Lawsuit filed by 17 states against abortion accommodations in the workplace can proceed
A lawsuit filed by 17 states challenging federal rules entitling workers to time off and other accommodations for abortions may proceed, a federal appeals court ruled. The Eighth Circuit Court's decision on Thursday reverses Eastern District of Arkansas U.S. District Judge D.P. Marshall, Jr.'s dismissal of the case in June after he found that the states lacked standing to sue. Eighth Circuit Chief Judge Steven M. Colloton, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush in 2003, wrote in Thursday's opinion that the states do have standing since they are subject to the federal rules. Led by Republican state attorneys general in Tennessee and Arkansas, the 17 states sued the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in April challenging its rules on how to implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, a 2022 bipartisan law requiring employers to make 'reasonable accommodations' for pregnant or postpartum employees. In addition to more routine pregnancy workplace accommodations like time off for prenatal appointments, more bathroom breaks, or permission to carry snacks, the rules say that workers can ask for time off to obtain an abortion and recover from the procedure. 'The Biden-era EEOC's attempt to turn a good law into an ideological weapon to force broad elective abortion accommodations is illegal,' Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti said in an emailed statement. 'The EEOC's unlawful regulations undermine the constitutional authority of the people's elected representatives and we are vindicated by the Court's decision to let our suit proceed.' The lawsuit — joined by state attorneys in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah and West Virginia — is one of several legal challenges to the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act rules. One case in Texas seeks to overturn the law in its entirety. The Eighth Circuit Court's decision to revive the case comes after a 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling opened the door to state abortion bans, and as bills to track and charge women who get abortions with murder have gotten attention in Missouri, North Dakota and Oklahoma state legislatures this month. The EEOC, which enforces U.S. anti-discrimination laws, during former President Joe Biden's administration published regulations that provide guidance for employers and workers on how to implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. In them, the agency said that workers can ask for time off to obtain an abortion and recover from the procedure, along with pregnancy-related medical conditions like miscarriage, stillbirth and lactation. Citing numerous court rulings, the EEOC in its regulations said it was conforming to decades of legal precedent establishing that pregnancy-related discrimination laws include abortion. But many Republican lawmakers, including Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, who co-sponsored the bill, were furious when the EEOC stated that the law covered abortions. Both Republican EEOC commissioners voted against the rules at the time. A spokesperson for the EEOC said the agency will 'refrain from discussing litigation' but referred The Associated Press to Acting Chair Andrea Lucas' position on the Commission's PWFA regulations, which she voted against. 'I support elements of the final rule. However, I am unable to approve it because it purports to broaden the scope of the statute in ways that, in my view, cannot reasonably be reconciled with the text,' she wrote in a statement at the time explaining her decision to vote against the rules. The EEOC has undergone significant change since President Donald Trump took office last month. After naming Lucas, a Republican, as acting chair, Trump fired two Democratic commissioners of the five-member bipartisan EEOC before their terms expired in an unprecedented move. Had the commissioners been allowed to carry out their terms, the EEOC would have had a Democratic majority well into Trump's term. The administration also dismissed Karla Gilbride as the EEOC's general counsel, replacing her with Andrew Rogers as acting counsel. Without a quorum, the EEOC cannot rescind its own rules, although Lucas in the statement said she intends for the EEOC to reconsider portions of the rules she believes are unsupported by law once a quorum is re-established. The Department of Justice represents the EEOC in court, and under Trump, it remains to be seen whether it will continue to fight the states' lawsuit. Inimai Chettiar, president of advocacy group A Better Balance, which spearheaded a decade-long campaign for the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and filed an amicus brief in support of the EEOC alongside National Women's Law Center, American Civil Liberties Union, and several more organizations, on Thursday called the Eighth Circuit Court's decision 'an attack on reproductive choice.' 'Workers in need of an abortion should not be discriminated against or forced off the job because of a need for vital health care,' she said. With Lucas' stated intention to alter the PWFA rules, the existing lawsuits against them, the EEOC firings and the DOJ changing hands under the new presidential administration, 'things are moving pretty fast and we're very concerned about what's going to happen to the PWFA regulations specifically that cover abortion,' Chettiar said. She emphasized that for the vast majority of Americans, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act is still the law of the land, and the EEOC's regulations remain in effect. 'This law is still on the books, the regulation is still on the books. Women still have access to all of these accommodations and they can call our free legal helpline if they need more clarification,' she said. _____
The Independent
21-02-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Lawsuit filed by 17 states against abortion accommodations in the workplace can proceed
A lawsuit filed by 17 states challenging federal rules entitling workers to time off and other accommodations for abortions may proceed, a federal appeals court ruled. The Eighth Circuit Court's decision on Thursday reverses Eastern District of Arkansas U.S. District Judge D.P. Marshall, Jr.'s dismissal of the case in June after he found that the states lacked standing to sue. Eighth Circuit Chief Judge Steven M. Colloton, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush in 2003, wrote in Thursday's opinion that the states do have standing since they are subject to the federal rules. Led by Republican state attorneys general in Tennessee and Arkansas, the 17 states sued the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in April challenging its rules on how to implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, a 2022 bipartisan law requiring employers to make 'reasonable accommodations' for pregnant or postpartum employees. In addition to more routine pregnancy workplace accommodations like time off for prenatal appointments, more bathroom breaks, or permission to carry snacks, the rules say that workers can ask for time off to obtain an abortion and recover from the procedure. 'The Biden-era EEOC's attempt to turn a good law into an ideological weapon to force broad elective abortion accommodations is illegal," Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti said in an emailed statement. 'The EEOC's unlawful regulations undermine the constitutional authority of the people's elected representatives and we are vindicated by the Court's decision to let our suit proceed.' The lawsuit — joined by state attorneys in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah and West Virginia — is one of several legal challenges to the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act rules. One case in Texas seeks to overturn the law in its entirety. The Eighth Circuit Court's decision to revive the case comes after a 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling opened the door to state abortion bans, and as bills to track and charge women who get abortions with murder have gotten attention in Missouri, North Dakota and Oklahoma state legislatures this month. The EEOC, which enforces U.S. anti-discrimination laws, during former President Joe Biden 's administration published regulations that provide guidance for employers and workers on how to implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. In them, the agency said that workers can ask for time off to obtain an abortion and recover from the procedure, along with pregnancy-related medical conditions like miscarriage, stillbirth and lactation. Citing numerous court rulings, the EEOC in its regulations said it was conforming to decades of legal precedent establishing that pregnancy-related discrimination laws include abortion. But many Republican lawmakers, including Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, who co-sponsored the bill, were furious when the EEOC stated that the law covered abortions. Both Republican EEOC commissioners voted against the rules at the time. A spokesperson for the EEOC said the agency will 'refrain from discussing litigation' but referred The Associated Press to Acting Chair Andrea Lucas' position on the Commission's PWFA regulations, which she voted against. 'I support elements of the final rule. However, I am unable to approve it because it purports to broaden the scope of the statute in ways that, in my view, cannot reasonably be reconciled with the text,' she wrote in a statement at the time explaining her decision to vote against the rules. The EEOC has undergone significant change since President Donald Trump took office last month. After naming Lucas, a Republican, as acting chair, Trump fired two Democratic commissioners of the five-member bipartisan EEOC before their terms expired in an unprecedented move. Had the commissioners been allowed to carry out their terms, the EEOC would have had a Democratic majority well into Trump's term. The administration also dismissed Karla Gilbride as the EEOC's general counsel, replacing her with Andrew Rogers as acting counsel. Without a quorum, the EEOC cannot rescind its own rules, although Lucas in the statement said she intends for the EEOC to reconsider portions of the rules she believes are unsupported by law once a quorum is re-established. The Department of Justice represents the EEOC in court, and under Trump, it remains to be seen whether it will continue to fight the states' lawsuit. Inimai Chettiar, president of advocacy group A Better Balance, which spearheaded a decade-long campaign for the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and filed an amicus brief in support of the EEOC alongside National Women's Law Center, American Civil Liberties Union, and several more organizations, on Thursday called the Eighth Circuit Court's decision 'an attack on reproductive choice." 'Workers in need of an abortion should not be discriminated against or forced off the job because of a need for vital health care," she said. With Lucas' stated intention to alter the PWFA rules, the existing lawsuits against them, the EEOC firings and the DOJ changing hands under the new presidential administration, 'things are moving pretty fast and we're very concerned about what's going to happen to the PWFA regulations specifically that cover abortion,' Chettiar said. She emphasized that for the vast majority of Americans, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act is still the law of the land, and the EEOC's regulations remain in effect. 'This law is still on the books, the regulation is still on the books. Women still have access to all of these accommodations and they can call our free legal helpline if they need more clarification,' she said. _____ The Associated Press' women in the workforce and state government coverage receives financial support from Pivotal Ventures. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
