Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

vsrazdem

(2,194 posts)
3. yes, for investigations. This is the DOJ representing Devoss, when they do not have to.
Thu Feb 11, 2021, 07:08 PM
Feb 2021

Going against students who were ripped off is going to anger a lot of people. This is unjust and it should be stopped immediately.


As a matter of law, the Biden administration does not have to take on DeVos’s representation here. The DOJ picks and chooses whether to represent present and former officials—but they are not bound by any rules, regulations or federal statues to do so. Additionally, there does not appear to be any extant legal authority for the DOJ to represent DeVos here in her personal capacity because she’s not actually a party to the underlying litigation. In order for DOJ to represent DeVos like this, the agency is supposed to initially file a statement of interest but no such document has been filed in the case.

The underlying case concerns hundreds of students who were defrauded by various for-profit colleges across the country. The students, all federal student loan borrowers who are currently in debt, sued the U.S. Department of Education because DeVos’s agency was accused of serially dragging its feet when asked to process student loan debt cancellation requests.

Multiple courts in the Northern District of California agreed with the students. DeVos herself ultimately admitted that student borrowers had paid for educational programs that were effectively “worthless.”

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I hope the president puts...»Reply #3