Interest rates on subsidized federal student loans doubled on Monday, going from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent.  Cato scholar Neal McCluskey argues that the most discouraging aspect of all this isn’t the financial impact of the doubling, but that Congress couldn’t get a deal done. “That’s bad news for any future compromise, but much more importantly, a clear and troubling sign of why we won’t get the long-term solution we need: getting Washington out of student aid entirely.”

• “6.8 Day Is Here!,” by Neal McCluskey
• “How about ‘Don’t Give Them Loans at All’?,” by Neal McCluskey
• “How Much Ivory Does This Tower Need? What We Spend on, and Get from, Higher Education,” by Neal McCluskey

The Senate on Thursday voted 68-32 to pass its sweeping immigration reform bill. Cato scholar Alex Nowrasteh says that while the bill has its flaws, it is still “a solid improvement over the current immigration system.”  The bill now moves to the House, where it will face an uphill battle.

• “Immigration Bill: Better, Not Best,” by Alex Nowrasteh
• “The Border Security Obsession,” by Alex Nowrasteh
• “How Does Immigration Impact Wages?,” by Alex Nowrasteh
• More Cato Research on Immigration

The Supreme Court last week struck down the Defense of Marriage Act as “unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment.”  In the Hollingsworth v. Perry (Prop 8) case, the Supreme Court found that the Ninth Circuit was without jurisdiction to consider the district court appeal, and remanded the case with instructions to dismiss.  Comments Cato scholar Ilya Shapiro, “The Court upheld the equal liberty and dignity of all individuals, regardless of sexual orientation.”

• “Equal Liberty Carries Day at SCOTUS,” by Ilya Shapiro
• “The Constitutional Case for Marriage Equality,” Cato Video with John D. Podesta, David Boaz, David Boies, Theodore B. Olson & Robert A. Levy
• Cato Briefs: Hollingsworth v. Perry | United States v. Windsor

The Supreme Court last week struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, a provision that subjected a now-random assortment of states and localities to onerous burdens and unusual federal oversight.  Cato scholar Ilya Shapiro notes, “Recognizing that the nation has changed, the Court aptly ended the extraordinary intrusion in state sovereignty that can no longer be justified by the facts on the ground. …Today’s ruling underlines, belatedly, that Jim Crow is dead.”

• “Jim Crow Is Dead. Long Live the Constitution,” by Ilya Shapiro
• “America Has Changed, So Voting Rights Act Section 5 Is No Longer Constitutional,” by Ilya Shapiro
• Cato’s Brief in Shelby County v. Holder