But in this case, and I’m referring to the forgiveness, not the BK changes, the other side is the US Government (at least that’s my understanding). So, the US Government, being the party to the contract, is settling with the debtors. The fact that the forgiveness is implemented by statute, in my opinion, doesn’t impact the conclusion.
ETA: I’m not that familiar with the proposals, but if we’re talking about private student loan debt, I completely agree that it’s wildly unfair, and should be illegal if it isn’t already, for the federal government to force 10k in loan forgiveness to borrowers unless the fedearl government is reimbursing the private lenders.
With respect to the BK, I do agree with you as it applies to private loans, though not as strongly as the above because, by it’s nature, bankruptcy is a creature of statute. Any lender, as with any other business owner, needs to consider the risks associated with changes to laws and/or the regulatory regime. I would say that applies even more-so to a student loan lender.
I do believe that any changes to the BK code applicable to private student loans should apply to student loans entered into after x date (that was anywhere from a couple months ago to some time in the future). But that’s what I believe. As opposed to the 10k forgiveness, I don’t think it should be illegal for the federal government to make changes to BK laws that can apply to future BK filings, but related to debt that was contracted before the change.