Judge approves Sweet v. Cardona student debt relief settlement, but likely appeal looms


Higher Ed Dive – Latest News

This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

A federal judge late Wednesday approved a massive class-action settlement intended to address allegations the U.S. Department of Education stonewalled hundreds of thousands of applications to a program that cancels student loan debts for borrowers whose colleges misled them.

U.S. District Judge William Alsup signed off on the agreement after taking a week to weigh final arguments in the three-year-old Sweet v. Cardona case. The case is about student debt relief that can be granted under the borrower defense to repayment program, which is separate from President Joe Biden’s wide-ranging initiative forgiving up to $10,000 or $20,000 in federal student loan debt for some 40 million borrowers — a $430 billion initiative that is tied up in different court cases.

Alsup’s decision sets the stage for the Education Department to automatically cancel debts for about 200,000 borrowers who attended 151 colleges, including shuttered large for-profit chains like ITT Technical Institute and still-operating institutions like Grand Canyon University. That would clear a total of about $6 billion in federal student loan debt. 

The settlement agreement also calls for the Education Department to quickly make borrower defense to repayment decisions on debt cancellation for another 64,000 borrowers — or to discharge their debts if a decision can’t be reached within specific timeframes based on how long they’ve been awaiting a ruling. This is projected to result in $1.5 billion in loans being cleared. 

Another part of the agreement requires the department to smooth borrower defense applications for those who applied to the program after the settlement agreement was reached. Automatic relief will be granted for those borrowers, who number about 179,000, if the Education Department doesn’t decide on their applications within three years of the settlement’s approval.

“This settlement is not only fair, reasonable, and adequate but a grand slam home run for class members,” Alsup wrote in an order approving the deal. “They originally sued just to get a decision one way or another on their applications. Now, they are getting total forgiveness in most cases.”

Four institutions and college operators whose former students are covered under the deal opposed it: American National University, Chicago School of Professional Psychology, Everglades College and Lincoln Educational Services Corp. They are on the list of 151 colleges whose former students can receive automatic forgiveness, and they argued their inclusion denied them due process and damaged their reputations.

An appeal to the judge’s Wednesday approval is likely, according to a statement issued by a trade group representing for-profit colleges, Career Education Colleges and Universities.

“The four intervenor schools made a compelling case that the Sweet settlement represents an unlawful overreach by the Department of Education and unfairly maligns over 150 institutions without any opportunity to respond,” Jason Altmire, CECU president and CEO, said in a statement. “We expect that the Ninth Circuit on appeal will recognize these fatal flaws and send the parties back to the negotiating table.”

Alsup addressed the colleges’ objections in his order approving the settlement. 

The deal does not use standard borrower defense to repayment procedures, and the Education Department therefore can’t use it as a basis to try to recoup loan discharge costs from the 151 institutions on the automatic debt relief list, he wrote. Institutions on the list would still have full due process rights if the Education Department were to take action against them in the future. And Alsup dismissed the idea that being included on the list of 151 colleges is “an impermissible scarlet letter.”

“This order finds the list does not carry the necessary legal significance to justify denying final approval of the settlement,” he wrote.

The Project on Predatory Student Lending, which represented the plaintiffs in the case, cheered the judge’s decision.

“Throughout this case, our clients exposed a fundamentally broken borrower defense system and the urgent need for reforms to hold predatory schools accountable,” Eileen Connor, president and director of the organization, said in a statement. “We are proud that this settlement with the Department of Education will help chart a more fair and accountable process for borrowers.”

Years of arguments over borrower defense to repayment

A winding path led to Wednesday’s ruling. 



Source link

Rick Seltzer and Natalie Schwartz

#Judge #approves #Sweet #Cardona #student #debt #relief #settlement #appeal #looms

By bpci

Leave a Reply