I'm a total outsider with an interest in legal theories and looking at this from the perspective of the current student loan forgiveness case (it hasn't been ruled on yet, but the Supreme Court has heard the arguments on the case). Jennifer Mascott's comments really hit home to me about basically how the Major Questions Doctrine just effectively gives the supreme court a different avenue to justify whatever decision aligns with their personal viewpoints on any given topic, although I certainly hope this is just a good theory and doesn't actually become a reality.
I'm a total outsider with an interest in legal theories and looking at this from the perspective of the current student loan forgiveness case (it hasn't been ruled on yet, but the Supreme Court has heard the arguments on the case). Jennifer Mascott's comments really hit home to me about basically how the Major Questions Doctrine just effectively gives the supreme court a different avenue to justify whatever decision aligns with their personal viewpoints on any given topic, although I certainly hope this is just a good theory and doesn't actually become a reality.
Thank You.