Chief Justice Roberts takes a final shot at Joe Biden by using Nancy Pelosi’s words against him

Chief Justice John Roberts cited former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in his majority opinion against President Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan.

Roberts released the Supreme Court opinion on Friday saying Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan was unconstitutional, stripping Biden of one of his key campaign promises.

In the opinion, Roberts used Pelosi’s words to illustrate that the president had no authority to write off federal student loan debt.

“As then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi clarified, ‘People think that the president of the United States has the power to forgive the debt. He doesn’t,” Roberts quoted Pelosi as saying. “‘He can postpone. He can delay. But he doesn’t have that power. This must be an act of Congress’”.

Pelosi made the statement at her press conference on July 28, 2021. Watch:

“People think that the president of the United States has the power [student loan] debt forgiveness It doesn’t.” — Nancy Pelosi (July 2021)pic.twitter.com/0iz8uQeKXG

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) June 30, 2023

Roberts added, “Other than reiterating its interpretation of the statute, the dissent offers little to rebut our conclusion that ‘here are indicators of our prior leading question cases,'” citing the concurring opinion of the Judge Amy Coney Barrett.

Meanwhile, President Biden has already announced a plan to avoid the Supreme Court’s ruling. On Friday, he announced his intention to implement a separate initiative to relieve student debt under the Higher Education Act of 1965.

“Today’s decision has closed a path. Now we’re going to pursue another,” Biden said from the White House. “We’re going to use every tool at our disposal to get the student debt relief you need and achieve your dreams.”

Nina Turner, a self-described educator and activist, responded to Pelosi’s citation of Roberts as “unacceptable.”

Rep. Nancy Pelosi was quoted in the ruling on student debt. unacceptable pic.twitter.com/JNqWSMDTeP

— Nina Turner (@ninaturner) June 30, 2023

Let’s just say that the radical left is not taking the Supreme Court ruling well. And putting in a quote from Pelosi is the icing on the wedding cake.

The Court is dealing with several high-profile cases as the summer approaches. In a separate case upholding the free speech rights of a Christian web designer, Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch harshly criticized Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent.

“It is difficult to read the dissent and conclude that we are examining the same case,” Gorsuch wrote in the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision Friday. That decision said web designer Lorie Smith was not legally required to design websites for gay marriage because doing so would violate her rights to free speech and Christian belief, despite a Colorado law that prohibits discrimination by sexual orientation.

Gorsuch added that Sotomayor’s dissent “reimagines the facts” from “top to bottom” and does not answer the fundamental question: “Can a state compel someone who offers his own expressive services to abandon his conscience and utter the your favorite message?”

“In some places, the dissent turns so much on the facts that it opens fire on its own position,” Gorsuch wrote. “For example: while stressing that a Colorado company cannot refuse ‘the full and equal enjoyment of.’ [its] services based on a client’s protection status. . . the dissent assures us that a company selling creative services “to the public” has the right “to decide what messages to include or not include.” . .’ But if that’s true, what are we debating about?”

The dissenting justices, Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, called the ruling a “blank check for discrimination,” expressing concern about its potential to implicitly assign gays and lesbians to an inferior status.

Sotomayor stated: “The disturbing majority opinion is this: what’s mine is mine, and what’s yours is yours. However, the history of public accommodation laws tells a different story. In a free and democratic society, social stratification has no place”.

The case, 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, captured the nation’s attention because it presented a clash between the First Amendment’s right to free speech and the principle of non-discrimination against LGBTQ people.

NOW READ:

Biden announces plan to appeal Supreme Court after student loan forgiveness ruling

“*” Indicates mandatory fields

OPINION: This article contains comments that reflect the opinion of the author.

Source link