Justice Barrett rejects appeal over Biden student debt plan

WASHINGTON (AP) — Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett on Thursday rejected an appeal from a Wisconsin taxpayers group seeking to stop the Biden administration’s student debt cancellation program.

Barrett did not comment in turning away the appeal from the Brown County Taxpayers Association, which also has lost rounds in lower federal courts. The group wrote in its Supreme Court filing that it needed an emergency order to put the program on hold because the administration could begin canceling outstanding student debt as soon as Sunday.

Barrett oversees emergency appeals from Wisconsin and neighboring states. She acted on her own, without involving the rest of the court.

U.S. District Judge William Griesbach had earlier dismissed the group’s lawsuit, finding they didn’t have the legal right, or standing, to bring the case. A panel of appellate judges refused to step in with an emergency order.

Regarding any problems that the people are having with the federal government, misguided, institutionally indoctrinated Supreme Court justices seemingly never check if the federal actions being challenged are reasonably justifiable under the relatively narrow powers that the states have expressly constitutionally given to the feds.

More specifically concerning this Wisconsin example, not only are the law schools evidently not teaching that the delegates to the Constitutional Convention (Con-Con) had decided not to give Congress the power to establish a national bank, but both Jefferson and Justice Joseph Story had also indicated that neither did the delegates give Congress the specific power to dictate, regulate, or tax and spend in the name of INTRAstate education.

Here's a clarification by Jefferson of no express constitutional power for Congress to establish a national bank.

"10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
"It is known that the very power now proposed as a means was rejected as an end by the Convention which formed the Constitution. A proposition was made to them to authorize Congress to open canals, and an amendatory one to empower them to incorporate. But the whole was rejected, and one of the reasons for rejection urged in debate was, that then they would have a power to erect a bank, which would render the great cities, where there were prejudices and jealousies on the subject, adverse to the reception of the Constitution [emphasis added]. — Jefferson's Opinion on the Constitutionality of a National Bank : 1791
"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States." —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824
"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]." —United States v. Butler, 1936.

In fact, from the Madison Debates, here's what Con-Con delegate, Mr. Rufus King, had said to help discourage the other delegates from giving Congress banking powers.

"Mr. KING. The States will be prejudiced and divided into parties by it. In Philada. & New York, It will be referred to the establishment of a Bank, which has been a subject of contention in those Cities. In other places it will be referred to mercantile monopolies." —Madison Debates, September 14, 1787.

President Thomas Jefferson again indicates no constitutional authority for feds to establish a national bank.

"Many are the exercises of power reserved to the States wherein a uniformity of proceeding would be advantageous to all. Such are quarantines, health laws, regulations of the press, banking institutions [emphasis added], training militia, etc., etc." —Thomas Jefferson to James Sullivan, 1807.

Militia training aside, Jefferson, along with Justice Joseph Story, had also clarified the obvious, that the states have never expressly conditionally given the feds the specific power to dictate, regulate, tax and spend in the name of intrastate schooling.

“The great mass of the articles on which impost is paid is foreign luxuries, purchased by those only who are rich enough to afford themselves the use of them. Their patriotism would certainly prefer its continuance and application to the great purposes of the public education, roads, rivers, canals, and such other objects of public improvement as it may be thought proper to add to the constitutional enumeration of federal powers [emphasis added].” —Thomas Jefferson: 6th Annual Message, 1806." (Jefferson is indicating that Congress cannot tax and spend in the name of intrastate infrastructure imo.)
"The power to regulate manufactures is no more confided to congress, than the power to interfere with the systems of education, the poor laws, or the road laws of the states [emphases added]." —Justice Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution 2, 1833.

The bottom line is that the states would be providing student loans, and collecting the interest, if the very corrupt, post-17th Amendment ratification Congress wasn't always stealing state revenues by means of unconstitutional federal taxes, taxes that Congress cannot reasonably justify under its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers, and a few other constitutionally enumerated expenses.

Insights welcome.

Trump's red tsunami of patriot supports, including closet Trump-supporting Democrats, need to take the next step in helping Trump to drain the swamp by voting Republican ticket in November.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.