Public case informationLast updated

Sweet v. McMahon Student Loan Borrower Settlement

U.S. Department of Education · Federal student loans and Borrower Defense to Repayment applications · Settlement Reached

About this case

Borrowers alleged that the U.S. Department of Education unlawfully delayed or failed to process Borrower Defense claims involving schools accused of misleading students about accreditation, earnings potential, and job placement. A 2022 settlement provided automatic loan cancellation for certain borrowers and timely review for others; a federal appeals court denied the administration's request to delay processing additional applications, and implementation remains ongoing.

Case overview

Defendant company
U.S. Department of Education
Product or service
Federal student loans and Borrower Defense to Repayment applications
Case name
Sweet v. McMahon
Case status
Settlement Reached
Lawsuit type
Consumer
Reported harm
Other

Participation information

Sweet settlement relief for covered borrowers

Individuals with pending Borrower Defense claims tied to specific schools covered by the class-action agreement or who fall within defined settlement groups may receive relief under the settlement. New applicants cannot join the settlement.

Covered borrowers in groups eligible for automatic cancellation do not need to file a new claim; the Department of Education is expected to process remaining discharges and applications under the settlement and court orders.

Type
Settlement Claim
Status
No action required
Total settlement amount
$23,000,000,000
Payout
Debt cancellation or claim processing relief under the settlement, depending on the borrower's settlement group and claim status.
Reported proof requirement
Unclear

Settlement loan discharge relief

The article identifies a final group of approximately 30,000 federal student-loan borrowers receiving discharge notifications under the settlement.

Type
Settlement Claim
Status
No action required
Payout
Discharge of qualifying federal student loan balances under the settlement.
Reported proof requirement
No

Sources