The Supreme Court of the United States authorized, on Friday June 30, for the first time, certain businesses to exclude LGBTQIA customers, then invalidated a flagship measure by Joe Biden on student debt, two decisions which confirm its anchorage on the right.

The day before, the high court, deeply overhauled by Donald Trump, had already abolished affirmative action policies at the university, one of the achievements of the civil rights struggle of the 1960s intended to increase diversity on campuses.

As a year ago, during its historic volte-face on abortion, these three judgments were delivered with the support of the six conservative magistrates, against the advice of the three progressive judges.

Republicans warmly applauded each of his decisions, while Democrats – Joe Biden in the lead – expressed their strong disagreement. On Friday, the American president said he was “very worried” about the increased risk of discrimination against sexual minorities.

Setback on student debt

But it was on student debt that he suffered his most painful setback: the Supreme Court ruled that his government had exceeded its powers by adopting a costly program without congressional authorization.

“There are millions of Americans who feel disappointed, discouraged and even a little angry because of the shutdown, and I must admit that I do too”, reacted Joe Biden during a televised address. The Democratic president, who is counting on the support of the working classes to win a new mandate in 2024, immediately announced a new plan to “relieve as many borrowers as possible as quickly as possible”.

Higher education costs a fortune in the United States, and nearly 43 million people have federal student loans to repay, for a total amount of 1,630 billion dollars (1,494 billion euros).

At the start of the pandemic, Donald Trump’s government froze the repayment of these loans under a 2003 law to “relieve” student debt holders in the event of a “national emergency”. This measure will end on August 31.

Anticipating this deadline, President Biden announced in August 2022 that he wanted to erase up to 20,000 dollars (just over 18,000 euros) from the slate of middle-income borrowers. The candidates had rushed and 26 million applications were filed, at a cost of more than 400 billion dollars (nearly 367 billion euros), according to the White House.

Conservative states had filed a complaint accusing the government of committing taxpayers’ money without a green light from Congress. According to them, the 2003 law, invoked by the administration, covers the freezing of the debt and not its cancellation. “We agree with them,” Justice John Roberts wrote on Friday, with the support of the other five Tory justices. The new plan proposed by Joe Biden will respect this ruling, the president said, and will be based on another text, the Higher Education Act of 1965.

It is the Court that “oversteps its role” by “substituting itself for Congress and the executive to make a decision of internal policy”, criticized its three progressive magistrates.

The Supreme Court rules in favor of a website creator who refuses to make them for gay marriages

Likewise, they spoke out against the “deeply unfair” decision of their colleagues to agree with a website designer who refuses, in the name of her Christian faith, to design websites for gay marriages. Companies whose services have creative value can invoke their freedom of expression not to provide a service that goes against their values, the majority justified.

This judgment is the culmination of a legal campaign launched by the religious right after the historic Supreme Court decision in 2015 to legalize same-sex marriage.

A first file had been brought by a Christian pastry chef who refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple. In 2018, the High Court had agreed with him on additional grounds, without enacting major principles.

The question was soon to come back to court, this time by a web designer, Lorie Smith, who challenged a Colorado law prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation under penalty of a fine of up to at 500 dollars (458 euros).

She rejoiced on her “victory” on Friday. “The government should never force anyone to say things they don’t mean,” she said in a video uploaded by religious freedom organization Alliance Defending Freedom, which represented.

The Court’s decision “will hurt and stigmatize LGBTQ families,” said Sarah Kate Ellis, president of the GLAAD association which defends this community. “This is yet another example of a Court that is out of touch with the vast majority of Americans. »