I Guess It Depends On What "Waive" And "Modify" Might Mean -- Ridiculous.

"The word means only what I say it means, Alice. . . ." [I guess I got this one wrong because I foolishly assumed the six Supremes could read the Oxford English Dictionary. Yikes.]

To be certain, there are multiple work-arounds to make this decision. . .

so much sturm and drang. From Justice Kagan's very wise dissent, then, a bit:

. . .One prior action, nowhere counted by the majority, is the suspension of loan payments and interest accrual begun in COVID’s first days. That action cost the Federal Government over $100 billion, and benefited many more borrowers than the forgiveness plan at issue. See supra, at 21. And second, it’s all relative. Past actions were more modest because the precipitating emergencies were more modest. (The COVID emergency generated, all told, over $5 trillion in Government relief spending.) In providing more significant relief for a more significant emergency -- or call it unprecedented relief for an unprecedented emergency -- the Secretary did what the HEROES Act contemplates. Imagine asking the enacting Congress: Can the Secretary use his powers to give borrowers more relief when an emergency has inflicted greater harm? can’t believe the majority really thinks Congress would have answered “no.”

In any event, the statute Congress passed does not say “no.” Delegations like the HEROES Act are designed to enable agencies to “adapt their rules and policies to the demands of changing circumstances.” FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 529 U. S. 120, 157 (2000). Congress allows, and indeed expects, agencies to take more serious measures in response to more serious problems. . . .

That's all I'll say, for now.

But the phrase "major questions" appears nowhere in the Constitution. Out.

नमस्ते