Is Biden’s student debt cancellation plan dead?Four Questions the Supreme Court Can Answer
Prof. Mark Rahdert explains what’s at stake in the student loan forgiveness controversy beyond the debt relief plan itself. Read More
Author: Mark Rahdert
Biden will be playing defense on student loans this week at the Supreme Court. Here’s why.
Prof. Mark Rahdert says that for SCOTUS’s conservative majority to rule against Pres. Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan, they would need to “backpedal” from their emphasis on reading laws for exactly what they say and nothing more. Read More
Student-Loan Forgiveness Case at Supreme Court Hinges on ‘Harm’
Prof. Mark Rahdert explains why standing could be an issue for the individual borrowers suing to stop student loan debt relief. Read More
Is Biden’s student debt forgiveness plan dead? Four questions the Supreme Court could answer
President Biden’s student loan debt relief plan is under challenge at the Supreme Court, with high stakes far beyond the merits of the case itself. But first, says Prof. Rahdert, plaintiffs will need to show they have standing to be there at all – a hurdle they may be unable to overcome. Read More
Your guide to the upcoming Supreme Court cases on student loan forgiveness
Prof. Mark Rahdert is a constitutional law scholar and expert on the Supreme Court. He offers his thoughts on the upcoming student loan debt cases being heard by the Court on Feb. 28. Read More
Understanding American Gun Violence Part 2: How to Solve the American Gun Epidemic
Prof. Mark Rahdert shares his proposal for challenging Heller and diluting political power on the Supreme Court in Temple’s Understanding American Gun Violence Part 2. Read More
Understanding American Gun Violence Part 1: The evolution of America’s relationship with firearms
Temple University experts, including Prof. Mark Rahdert, contribute to this multifaceted examination of gun violence in America. Read More
Temple Law Faculty Reacts to the Trump v. Mazars USA and Trump v. Vance Decisions
On July 9, 2020, Chief Justice John Roberts delivered a 7-2 opinion in Trump v. Mazars USA, refusing to enforce congressional subpoenas that sought President Trump’s tax returns and other financial records about himself, his children, and affiliated businesses. On July 9, 2020, Chief Justice John Roberts delivered a 7-2 opinion in Trump v. Vance, allowing state prosecutors to subpoena financial records concerning President Trump and his businesses. Craig Green Professor of Law Trump v. Mazars USA: Just months before the presidential election, the Supreme Court declined to enforce subpoenas that could have publicly revealed President Trump’s tax returns and financial conduct. Congressional committees demanded various financial records using their “legislative power,” seeking to investigate the need for possible statutory reform about corruption, terrorism, money laundering, or election interference. One committee also claimed oversight power to investigate executive misconduct. Mazars is the first time that any Supreme Court examined a congressional subpoena for a President’s personal information. The majority created a new “balanced approach” that tried to respect the long history of congressional subpoenas without …
Lehigh County Demands Paint Industry Help with Lead Abatement
Professor Mark Rahdert is quoted in this article from The Morning Call. Read the Full Article
Lehigh County Seal Case Comes as Court May Lower Church, State Wall
Professor Mark Rahdert was quoted in this article from the Allentown Morning Call. Read the Full Article
