In an era of increasing indebtedness among consumers, in general, and students, in particular, increasing wealth inequality and rising unemployment, it is instructive to examine existing social mechanisms for redress. Many societies allow debtors to get a fresh start through bankruptcy. In the US, the ability of student debtors to use this mechanism is limited to those suffering "undue hardship." The definition of undue hardship is conceptually vague and judges bring their own understandings of the social world to play in their judgments. This article examines the ways in which judgments about consumption patterns and labor disengagement differ by class of debtors. Judges' denials of relief reflect common stereotypes about the reasons debtors are in over their heads, relying predominantly on individualistic frames. At the same time, judges' grants of relief reflect differential expectations of consumer practices and behaviors. The evidence shows that debtors with law degrees are enjoined to be more ambitious in their careers, while social workers are encouraged to be less selfish, and truck drivers and others with low educational credentials are admonished to be more humble in their expectations and purchases. Through this examination we see how class boundaries are enforced though judicial pronouncements and how labor is disciplined according to predominant beliefs about how the world works.