(no subject)
Dec. 7th, 2005 12:26 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ebonlockChrist am I happy I'll have my student loans paid off next year:
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Wednesday that the government can seize a person's
Social Security benefits to pay old student loans.
Retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote the decision that went against a disabled man, James Lockhart, who had sued claiming he needed all of his $874 monthly check to pay for food and medication.
His government benefits had been cut by 15 percent to cover debts he incurred for college in the 1980s.
Lockhart also lost at the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which said that Congress had eliminated a 10-year time limit on the government's right to seek repayment on defaulted student loans by seizing payments, including Social Security, to individuals.
The Bush administration had maintained that the case was important because outstanding student loans total about $33 billion, which includes about $7 billion in delinquent debt. Of the delinquent loans, about half are over 10 years old, government lawyers have said.
"And goddammit if we don't squeeze every last cent out of penniless retirees we might have to do something crazy like raise taxes on the rich!"
[...]
Groups like the AARP and the National Consumer Law Center had urged the court to safeguard Social Security benefits in the Lockhart case, arguing they "are critical in preserving a measure of financial independence for older and disabled workers."
Lockhart, 67, a former postal worker who now lives in public housing in Seattle, has heart disease, diabetes and other health problems. He has about $77,000 in student loan debt.
O'Connor's ruling, a brief 4 1/2 pages, will likely be one of her last. She is retiring after 24 years.
Why do I get the feeling she won't be living off canned dog food on $874 a month?
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Wednesday that the government can seize a person's
Social Security benefits to pay old student loans.
Retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote the decision that went against a disabled man, James Lockhart, who had sued claiming he needed all of his $874 monthly check to pay for food and medication.
His government benefits had been cut by 15 percent to cover debts he incurred for college in the 1980s.
Lockhart also lost at the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which said that Congress had eliminated a 10-year time limit on the government's right to seek repayment on defaulted student loans by seizing payments, including Social Security, to individuals.
The Bush administration had maintained that the case was important because outstanding student loans total about $33 billion, which includes about $7 billion in delinquent debt. Of the delinquent loans, about half are over 10 years old, government lawyers have said.
"And goddammit if we don't squeeze every last cent out of penniless retirees we might have to do something crazy like raise taxes on the rich!"
[...]
Groups like the AARP and the National Consumer Law Center had urged the court to safeguard Social Security benefits in the Lockhart case, arguing they "are critical in preserving a measure of financial independence for older and disabled workers."
Lockhart, 67, a former postal worker who now lives in public housing in Seattle, has heart disease, diabetes and other health problems. He has about $77,000 in student loan debt.
O'Connor's ruling, a brief 4 1/2 pages, will likely be one of her last. She is retiring after 24 years.
Why do I get the feeling she won't be living off canned dog food on $874 a month?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-12-08 04:57 am (UTC)