Justices to Rule on Seizure of Social Security Income

WASHINGTON -- In the latest installment of the baby-boomers-reach-retirement-age saga, the Supreme Court said Monday it would decide whether the government can seize Social Security benefits from former college students who failed to repay their student loans.
...
To resolve the dispute, the U.S. justices voted to hear the case of James Lockhart, a Washington state man who went to four colleges in the 1980s with the help of federally guaranteed student loans. He became disabled from diabetes and heart disease and was unemployed in 1991 when he defaulted on nine student loans.

Lockhart was living on the $874 per month that he received from Social Security's disability program in 2002. At the time, he had $80,000 in unpaid student loans.

To repay his debts, the government took $93 a month from his disability benefits. A year later, Lockhart reached age 65 and began receiving old age benefits instead of disability benefits. Now, the government is taking $143 per month from his benefits.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-debts26apr26,0,6758603.story?coll=la-home-headlines

and say "None of that, madam. Keep working."

out of the trust fund to put into the general fund to say, 'hey, look at all that $$ in the general fund! We better cut taxes for the top 1% of Americans!'

But the repugs have probably changed the rules but when I became disabled, I was able to have my student loans canceled as a result. That was in the 70s, though, and no doubt some sort of social do-gooder program that thought if you were disabled and unable to work, you probably couldn't afford to pay off student loans. How positively socialist of them! /sarcasm

It's a loan and there's a risk in making any loan. Write it off!! If the USSC permits this apalling overreach, then nobody's safe from total impoverishment on the altar of fascist greed.

my husband and i have a huge student loan debt. i consolidated many years ago with that federal direct loan thing, as did my husband. when i consolidated THEY screwed up and left 2 loans off the consolidation. they went into default and they snatched my income tax return. i have spent over 100 hours on the phone with these idiots over the past 10 years trying to straighten things out.i get monthly bills saying "no payment is due" ( i was unemployed for awhile and on a deferrment) then i get phone calls saying i am past due and owe 2000.00. i finally gave up and said screw them. i have no doubt that i paid back my original principal at this point and refuse to pay any more than 5 bucks a month. (i know that if you pay SOMETHING, they cant really do anything)... but heres the kicker. my original loans were around 20 grand. now i owe 50 grand. my husbands were about 60 grand. now hes at 120 grand..anyone else know if they can come take my child away??? lol.

I got a divorce just after my student loans became due after working for some time on a doctorate in history as a middle-aged student. Had to go to work instead, support my 18-year-old son in college, and all on a medium-to-low income at first. I had to get multiple deferments in order to pay the rent. Eventually I started making enough to pay regularly on it, but by that time it had ballooned to twice the monthly payment it originally was. I am retired now. Ten years ago I asked Sallie Mae if they would take it out of my Social Security when I retired if I couldn't pay. This brought a snippy response, aghast at the very idea that they would not do so. So I continue to pay. I am 62 years old now. Just beginning to pay on the original loan rather than just interest.

If he is receiving ss disability, he certainly should be eligible, unless he was disabled with those conditions when he went to school. If that is the case, there has to be a new disability to fulfil eligibility requirements for the cancellation of those loans.

I did not think they could take ss for repayment of student loans. That is just not right.

And also at a "poverty" level income...so "Hardship" rules (non-collectible status) would apply.

Something indeed "fishy" here.