1
00:00:00,120 --> 00:00:03,560
Speaker 1: You're listening to Bloomberg law. A few months before Barack

2
00:00:03,680 --> 00:00:07,600
Speaker 1: Obama left office, his Education Department issued new rules governing

3
00:00:07,680 --> 00:00:11,000
Speaker 1: student debt and claims by borrowers that they were defrauded

4
00:00:11,039 --> 00:00:13,399
Speaker 1: by the school. The rules were the product of two

5
00:00:13,520 --> 00:00:15,880
Speaker 1: years of negotiation, and they were set to take effect

6
00:00:16,239 --> 00:00:20,040
Speaker 1: this last July the first, but Donald Trump's Education Secretary

7
00:00:20,079 --> 00:00:23,360
Speaker 1: Bessie de Vos last month blocked implementation of the rules

8
00:00:23,600 --> 00:00:26,880
Speaker 1: and said the department would would rewrite them. Now she

9
00:00:27,080 --> 00:00:31,880
Speaker 1: is facing a lawsuit by nineteen state attorneys general. Seventeen

10
00:00:31,920 --> 00:00:34,839
Speaker 1: state attorneys general excuse me who say that that the

11
00:00:34,960 --> 00:00:38,680
Speaker 1: vas would leave students at risk. It all has important

12
00:00:38,720 --> 00:00:43,040
Speaker 1: implications for colleges, student borrowers, and taxpayers. And with with

13
00:00:43,120 --> 00:00:46,200
Speaker 1: us to help sort it all out is Catherine Lee Carey,

14
00:00:46,479 --> 00:00:49,400
Speaker 1: special counsel at the law firm Cooley Kate. Thanks for

15
00:00:49,479 --> 00:00:53,080
Speaker 1: joining us, um. These are complicated rules are a lot

16
00:00:53,080 --> 00:00:56,120
Speaker 1: of different aspects to them, including standards that apply when

17
00:00:56,160 --> 00:00:59,200
Speaker 1: students who say they were defrauded. I want to get

18
00:00:59,200 --> 00:01:01,640
Speaker 1: out of having to pay the debts. What are the

19
00:01:01,680 --> 00:01:07,840
Speaker 1: attorneys generals seem most focused on in their lawsuit? Well,

20
00:01:07,920 --> 00:01:12,240
Speaker 1: thanks for having me and you're right, very complicated. The

21
00:01:12,400 --> 00:01:17,440
Speaker 1: ages are focused on two primary issues, one being what

22
00:01:17,480 --> 00:01:22,120
Speaker 1: they considered to be deprivation of rights and benefits for

23
00:01:22,160 --> 00:01:25,080
Speaker 1: their enforcement actions, and the other being um what they

24
00:01:25,120 --> 00:01:28,160
Speaker 1: consider to be harmed to students if the regulations are

25
00:01:28,240 --> 00:01:32,720
Speaker 1: rolled back. Specifically, as part of the new rules, the

26
00:01:32,920 --> 00:01:35,880
Speaker 1: Department of Ed would have considered as part of their

27
00:01:35,959 --> 00:01:39,480
Speaker 1: process for determining whether or not student claims had a

28
00:01:39,720 --> 00:01:42,720
Speaker 1: basis or if a group claim could be created, would

29
00:01:42,760 --> 00:01:47,640
Speaker 1: be using an AG's successful enforcement action against the school. So,

30
00:01:48,120 --> 00:01:52,160
Speaker 1: by virtue of incorporating the a G action specifically into

31
00:01:52,240 --> 00:01:56,960
Speaker 1: the rule, it more uh directly connected the AG's work

32
00:01:57,120 --> 00:02:01,280
Speaker 1: to protect students into the actual regularly. And then the

33
00:02:01,320 --> 00:02:04,200
Speaker 1: other piece of it is the idea of deterring what

34
00:02:04,280 --> 00:02:07,480
Speaker 1: they consider to be predatory behavior of schools with the

35
00:02:07,600 --> 00:02:11,200
Speaker 1: financial responsibility requirements that are in the rule. And then

36
00:02:11,240 --> 00:02:14,400
Speaker 1: on the student side, they they are primarily focused on

37
00:02:14,440 --> 00:02:18,680
Speaker 1: the idea of students having the personal um rights of

38
00:02:18,760 --> 00:02:22,640
Speaker 1: action against the school through litigation as opposed to arbitration

39
00:02:22,960 --> 00:02:25,760
Speaker 1: or class action that has that would would have been

40
00:02:25,880 --> 00:02:30,040
Speaker 1: essentially barred by the July one rule, where schools could

41
00:02:30,040 --> 00:02:32,840
Speaker 1: not force a student to enter into an arbitration agreement

42
00:02:32,919 --> 00:02:35,920
Speaker 1: or a class action waiver prior to UM an actual

43
00:02:35,919 --> 00:02:38,400
Speaker 1: dispute coming up, So those are sort of the primary

44
00:02:38,400 --> 00:02:41,639
Speaker 1: focuses of the a G suit. Kate. This lawsuit came

45
00:02:41,760 --> 00:02:44,680
Speaker 1: three days after the d C. Appeals Court reviewed the

46
00:02:44,720 --> 00:02:49,560
Speaker 1: e p A for unilaterally delaying Obama era methane regulations.

47
00:02:49,960 --> 00:02:53,640
Speaker 1: Did Divace do the same thing here by not engaging

48
00:02:53,840 --> 00:02:59,720
Speaker 1: in the legal process for changing or rescinding regulations? There

49
00:02:59,760 --> 00:03:03,400
Speaker 1: does seemed to be some correlation between the arguments that

50
00:03:03,440 --> 00:03:06,480
Speaker 1: are being made on both sides the There are a

51
00:03:06,520 --> 00:03:09,760
Speaker 1: couple of things that seemed to distinguish the two. One

52
00:03:10,040 --> 00:03:12,560
Speaker 1: is that the e p A rule was already in

53
00:03:12,639 --> 00:03:15,000
Speaker 1: effect and it was just a certain provision of the

54
00:03:15,080 --> 00:03:16,919
Speaker 1: rule that was to go and effect in June that

55
00:03:17,000 --> 00:03:19,280
Speaker 1: they were trying to roll back, as opposed to the

56
00:03:19,280 --> 00:03:22,360
Speaker 1: borrow defense rule, which had not become effective yet at

57
00:03:22,400 --> 00:03:25,080
Speaker 1: the time that they are trying to stay the rule.

58
00:03:25,680 --> 00:03:28,400
Speaker 1: But I do think that there are some similar legal

59
00:03:28,480 --> 00:03:32,239
Speaker 1: issues that will likely come up UM in this a

60
00:03:32,400 --> 00:03:34,960
Speaker 1: G case that's similar to the case that came up

61
00:03:35,000 --> 00:03:37,720
Speaker 1: with the a p A in relation to their authority

62
00:03:37,840 --> 00:03:41,680
Speaker 1: to delay a rule that already went through the negotiated

63
00:03:41,760 --> 00:03:45,080
Speaker 1: rulemaking process without having a new negotiate rulemaking process. So

64
00:03:45,280 --> 00:03:46,880
Speaker 1: there's a lot of the same questions I think in

65
00:03:46,920 --> 00:03:50,160
Speaker 1: both situations. One of the things that Petsy Divas is

66
00:03:50,160 --> 00:03:53,119
Speaker 1: saying in response, or the Education Department of saying in response,

67
00:03:53,280 --> 00:03:56,080
Speaker 1: is that she she took this action in prep because

68
00:03:56,120 --> 00:04:00,200
Speaker 1: there is a lawsuit filed by for profit college is

69
00:04:00,280 --> 00:04:04,520
Speaker 1: against the Education Department challenging this new rule. Is that,

70
00:04:04,600 --> 00:04:09,040
Speaker 1: in your mind a legitimate defense by devas in the

71
00:04:09,120 --> 00:04:11,520
Speaker 1: Education Department or is that that kind of a figli

72
00:04:11,640 --> 00:04:16,279
Speaker 1: for the for for defending what they did. That's a

73
00:04:16,279 --> 00:04:20,440
Speaker 1: great question. Uh. The lawsuit that's brought by um TAPS

74
00:04:20,560 --> 00:04:23,719
Speaker 1: the California Association of Private post Secondary Schools is first

75
00:04:23,720 --> 00:04:25,880
Speaker 1: of all, not all for profit schools, just to put

76
00:04:25,920 --> 00:04:28,320
Speaker 1: that out there. There There mostly for profit, but there's some

77
00:04:28,360 --> 00:04:32,640
Speaker 1: nonprofits in there too. UM. The underlying claims in the

78
00:04:32,640 --> 00:04:37,000
Speaker 1: CAPS lawsuit are focused on, Uh. The essentially what their

79
00:04:37,080 --> 00:04:41,520
Speaker 1: argument is that that that it wasn't appropriately drawn regulations

80
00:04:41,520 --> 00:04:43,560
Speaker 1: to begin with, that it violates the h A goes

81
00:04:43,600 --> 00:04:47,440
Speaker 1: beyond the scope of the statutory authority, and so what

82
00:04:47,640 --> 00:04:50,880
Speaker 1: they're claiming is that the rule itself is arbitrary and

83
00:04:50,920 --> 00:04:54,640
Speaker 1: capricious and should never have been UM sort of published period.

84
00:04:55,080 --> 00:04:58,520
Speaker 1: So it is something that I think that an agency

85
00:04:58,600 --> 00:05:01,160
Speaker 1: like the Department of Ed UM would have to obviously

86
00:05:01,440 --> 00:05:03,640
Speaker 1: look at and consider and determine whether or not they

87
00:05:04,080 --> 00:05:05,920
Speaker 1: think there's merit there or there's the chance that they

88
00:05:06,000 --> 00:05:08,320
Speaker 1: might lose UM, which I think was part of the

89
00:05:08,400 --> 00:05:11,520
Speaker 1: argument that that the Secretary is making. UM. But it

90
00:05:11,680 --> 00:05:15,600
Speaker 1: is similar arguments that the a G is making to

91
00:05:15,720 --> 00:05:18,200
Speaker 1: the e p A case, which is that the idea

92
00:05:18,279 --> 00:05:21,159
Speaker 1: that this CAP's lawsuit as the basis for the delay

93
00:05:21,240 --> 00:05:24,320
Speaker 1: is somehow pretextual. UM. I think that it's a very

94
00:05:24,360 --> 00:05:28,359
Speaker 1: similar argument. I frankly, I'm not I'm no way claimed

95
00:05:28,400 --> 00:05:31,840
Speaker 1: to be an Administrative Procedures Act ex person, but UM,

96
00:05:32,040 --> 00:05:34,440
Speaker 1: I can tell you that there is there's some UM

97
00:05:34,720 --> 00:05:38,440
Speaker 1: potential underlying UM similarity there that that I'm sure that

98
00:05:38,480 --> 00:05:42,479
Speaker 1: the ages will bring into their arguments. UM. I frankly

99
00:05:42,520 --> 00:05:44,919
Speaker 1: don't know what the Department of Ed was, you know,

100
00:05:44,960 --> 00:05:47,159
Speaker 1: sort of pondering at the time, and they're they're making

101
00:05:47,160 --> 00:05:51,080
Speaker 1: this decision UM. But obviously the CAP's lawsuit was I

102
00:05:51,080 --> 00:05:53,120
Speaker 1: think it was filed more than a month before the rule,

103
00:05:53,240 --> 00:05:55,960
Speaker 1: so it obviously was part of the consideration whether or

104
00:05:56,040 --> 00:05:58,560
Speaker 1: not it was, um, we're gonna have to I'm afraid

105
00:05:58,600 --> 00:06:00,560
Speaker 1: we're gonna have to leave it there. Thank you. Catherinely

106
00:06:00,640 --> 00:06:04,120
Speaker 1: Carey talking about this new lawsuit by actually nineteen, not seventeen,

107
00:06:04,120 --> 00:06:07,440
Speaker 1: state attorneys general challenging action by the Education Department.