John recently purchased a new stereo from Jane's Stereo Outlet. He did not pay the full price and instead agreed to pay $200 per month for six months. After two months, John stopped paying. John lives in Florida where there is a garnishment statute allowing lenders to take money out of debtor's paychecks. Jane's Stereo Outlet went to the courthouse and filed the necessary paperwork. That afternoon, the court mailed a letter to John informing him that his wages will be garnished in two weeks. Two weeks later, when John got his next paycheck, he realized that $200 (1/3 of the total) had been taken out. John then asked the court to stop the garnishment and the court clerk said he would need to wait until a full hearing could be held. John then requested a hearing, but learned that the next available time would not be until two months later. John thinks his due process rights have been violated and that, therefore, the state statute is unconstitutional. Analyze how a court would respond to John's argument.