top of page

Litigation Overview and Analysis

Supreme Court Litigation

Brown v. US Dep't of Education

Original Juridiction: N.D. Tx.

Hon. Mark Timothy Pittman presiding

Oral Arguments: Feb. 2023


Plaintiffs, a commercial FFELP borrower and a Direct Loan borrower ineligible for the Pell Grant, allege that they are arbitrarily excluded from cancellation (entirely and partially, respectively).

Nebraska v. Biden

Original Juridiction: E.D. Mo.

Hon. Henry Edward Autrey presiding

Oral Arguments: Feb. 2023


The states argue that, those states with FFELP lending programs will lose revenue because cancellation incentivizes FFELP borrowers to consolidate out of the lender's portfolio, and that MOHELA, which is also a servicer of federally held loans will see a reducation in its servicing portfolio. The six plaintiff states also allege that since cancellation will not be taxed at the federal level, the states of Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, and South Carolina will see a decrease in income tax revenue.

Supreme Court Litigation

Other Federal Litigation

Cato Inst. v. US Dep't of Educ.

Juridiction: D. Kan.

Hon. Toby Crouse presiding

Filed: Oct. 18, 2022


The plaintiff, a DC-based nonprofit, alleges that cancellation disincentivizes borrowers from seeking PSLF and thus deprives public service nonprofits of potential employees, putting them at a competitive disadvantage compared to other employers.

Laschober v. Cardona

Juridiction: D. Or.

Hon. Karin Immergut presiding

Filed. Sept. 12, 2022


The plaintiff, an Oregon homeowner with an adjustable-rate mortgage, argues that cancellation will increase rates of inflation and thus, his annual interest expense.

Brown Cnty. Taxpayers Ass'n v. Biden

Juridiction: E.D. Wis.

Hon. William C. Griesbach presiding

Filed: Oct. 4, 2022


The plaintiff, a Wisconsin-based unincorporated association of about 100 members, alleges that cancellation could cost taxpayers more than $1 trillion and is racially discriminatory.

Garrison v. US Dep't of Education

Juridiction: S.D. Ind.

Hon. Richard L. Young presiding

Filed: Sept. 27, 2022


The plaintiff, a Pell Grant recipient and Indiana resident, alleges that cancellation will cause him and similarly situated borrowers in five other states to suffer state income tax liability that they would otherwise be exempt from under the PSLF program.

Arizona v. Biden

Juridiction: D. Ariz.

Hon. Steven Paul Logan presiding

Filed: Sept. 30, 2022


Plaintiff, the state of Arizona, argues that cancellation will prevent its OAG from recruiting legal talent as borrowers will no longer need to rely on PSLF (and public service employment) to have their student loan debt forgiven. Further, Arizona alleges that cancellation will harm the state's economy by decreasing income tax revenue; increasing inflation and the cost of borrowing; and increasing the amount of consumer (cancellation-related) fraud state law enforcement will need to prosecute.

Other Federal Litigation
bottom of page