US Government Debt Different - Finance Department - University of ...

Charles W. Mooney, Jrcontext of bankruptcy provides a strong rebuttal of arguments thatthe exercise by Congress of its powers under the Bankruptcy Clause,even if prospective, is immune from attack as an unconstitutionaltaking. 92 Thomas Plank has reached the same conclusion. 93203There would seem to be little question that the powers of Congressunder the Bankruptcy Clause must yield to the Takings Clause. It is afundamental constitutional principal that the general powers grantedto Congress in the Constitution, including the Bankruptcy Clause,are subject to the Bill of Rights. 94 Surprisingly, however, scholarswho have debated the issue have failed to take note of this general,overarching principle. In his thoughtful and thorough article, forexample, James Rogers acknowledged and proceeded to rebut theprevailing view at the time that legislation under the BankruptcyClause is subject to the Takings Clause. 95 But neither Rogers nor Forresterexplicitly took note of this general principle which appears tobe dispositive of the question. Even so, it is doubtful that Alternative1 would present an unconstitutional taking. If the Prosperity Sharesdistribution would pass muster under a Chapter 9-like best intereststest, discussed above, that should constitute “just compensation” asit would under Chapter 9 itself.The downside of implementing Alternative 1 through a sovereignbankruptcy regime is the involvement of a court. Even if handled bynonjudicial administrators, a system of appeals no doubt would bea necessary element of the system. That necessarily provides a forumfor non-exempted Treasuries holders to attack the constitutionalityof the scheme through a challenge to the scope of the BankruptcyClause or otherwise.92 Forrester, supra note 90, at 854, 871-72, 885, 905, 911-12.93 Plank, supra, note 90, at 1090 n.106.94 See, e.g., John E. Nowak & Ronald D. Rotunda, Constitutional Law 208 (7thed. 2004) (“The commerce power, like all other federal powers, is subject to the restrictionsof the Bill of Rights and other fundamental constitutional guarantees.”); 1Tribe, American Constitutional Law 851 (3d ed. 2000) (“There are, however, otherlimits on those [congressional] powers . . . One obvious example is the Bill of Rights,which forbids measures that might otherwise be thought to fall within Congress’Article I powers (e.g., prohibiting those engaged in commerce from speaking onpolitical subjects).”).95 Rogers, supra note 91