Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/22-535_i3kn.pdf
Page Number: 5.0

Cite as:  600 U. S. ____ (2023) 

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the 
United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to  notify  the  Reporter  of 
Decisions,  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  Washington,  D. C.  20543, 
pio@supremecourt.gov, of any typographical or other formal errors. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 22–535 
_________________ 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, ET AL., PETITIONERS 
v. MYRA BROWN, ET AL. 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT 

[June 30, 2023] 

JUSTICE ALITO delivered the opinion of the Court. 
In August 2022, the Secretary of Education announced a
large-scale student-loan forgiveness program.  He pledged 
to discharge hundreds of billions of dollars in student-loan 
debt owed by millions of borrowers.  According to the Secre-
tary,  the  discharge  was  necessary  to  alleviate  hardship
caused  by  the  impending  resumption  of  loan  repayments, 
which  had  been  suspended  during  the  multi-year  corona-
virus pandemic, and he therefore invoked authority that he
claimed he enjoyed under the Higher Education Relief Op-
portunities  for  Students  Act  of  2003  (HEROES  Act).    117 
Stat. 904, codified at 20 U. S. C. §1070 et seq.  The following
month, the Secretary directed that specific actions be taken
to implement the loan-forgiveness plan (Plan).  The amount 
of relief available to a borrower under the Plan depends on 
various  criteria,  including  the  borrower’s  income  and  the
type of loan the borrower holds.

Before the Plan took effect, however, various plaintiffs—
including  respondents  here—sued  to  enjoin  it.    Respond-
ents  are  two  individual  borrowers  who,  for  different  rea-
sons, do not qualify for the maximum relief available under