Multiple organizations sued on Friday to stop the Biden administration’s new student-loan-repayment plan, which they argue is unconstitutional and would burden American taxpayers like the illegal student loan bailout struck down by the Supreme Court in June.

On behalf of the Cato Institute and the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, the New Civil Liberties Alliance filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan to block the Saving on Valuable Education (SAVE) program.

The suing parties allege that the U.S. Department of Education’s plan violates the Constitution’s appropriations clause, which grants only Congress the power to cancel debt owed to the Treasury. Since the plan was announced, the Biden administration has rushed its implementation, already opening online applications “instead of promulgating the plan through the required notice-and-comment and negotiated rulemaking process under the Administrative Procedure Act,” the NCLA asserted in a press release.

The plan cuts down monthly payments, asking borrowers to make payments of only 5 percent of their discretionary income. REPAYE, the plan that preceded SAVE, typically fixed monthly payments at 10 percent of the borrower’s discretionary income. Its replacement would also speed up loan forgiveness for many borrowers. For example, those whose debt has an original principal balance of $12,000 or less would qualify for forgiveness after ten years of payments, the Hill noted. In addition, interest doesn’t accrue on borrowers’ loan balances when their monthly payments are not sufficient to pay the interest.

In rejecting Biden’s student-loan-cancellation scheme, the conservative bench ruled that Biden lacked the authority to forgive student loans for entire categories of borrowers under the HEROES Act of 2003.

“In the Nebraska case, the Supreme Court struck down the Department of Education’s brazen attempt to pull a billion-dollar ‘elephant’ out of a statutory ‘mousehole,'” Sheng Li, litigation counsel for NCLA, said in a statement. “This time the Department’s loan-cancellation scheme does not even pretend to have a statutory ‘mousehole.’”