Don’t get your hopes up too high yet, but it may be that the United States actually has, as the U.S. Constitution indicates, three co-equal branches of government.
I will explain. On Monday afternoon, the “Top Story” on Yahoo’s Finance page shouted the following:
“HIGH COURT BLOCKS CHRYSLER SALE TO FIAT
Justice Ginsburg delays Chrysler sale to Fiat
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has temporarily delayed Chrysler’s sale to Fiat.
Ginsburg says in an order Monday that the sale is “stayed pending further order.”
The action indicates that the delay may only be temporary.
Chrysler has said a delay could scuttle the deal.
A federal appeals court in New York had earlier approved the sale, but gave opponents until 4 p.m. EDT Monday to try to get the Supreme Court to intervene.
Ginsburg issued her order just before 4 p.m., when Chrysler would have been free to complete the sale of most of its assets to Fiat.
Ginsburg could decide on her own whether to extend the delay or ask the full court to decide. It is unclear when she or the court will act.”
This excites me. Do you know why? Are you aware of what it’s all about?
Of all people, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, liberal justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, is actually telling the Obama administration to back off in their plan to nationalize, among other things, the auto industry. At least temporarily.
Breitbart.com had this story, which is worth reading to get the lay of the land. But notice that the article doesn’t even mention until the tenth paragraph that the suit challenges the constitutionality of using money from TARP, which was hurriedly passed to bail out the banking industry, to bail out the auto industry.
And here’s an interesting story from Bloomberg.com called “Obama Tells Some American Businesses To Drop Dead.”
And, need it be said, the whole current climate is helped along by the adoring media.
But here are three telling paragraphs from an Associated Press story on Sunday, June 7:
“The Indiana State Police Pension Fund, the Indiana Teacher’s Retirement Fund and the state’s Major Moves Construction Fund claim the deal unfairly favors the interests of the company’s unsecured stakeholders ahead of those of secured debtholders such as themselves.
“The funds also challenged the constitutionality of the Treasury Department’s use of Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, funds to supply Chrysler's bankruptcy protection financing. They say the Treasury did so without congressional authority.
“The government-sponsored reorganization of the U.S. auto industry, including the Chrysler bankruptcy proceedings, ‘is a matter of incredibly high profile and importance,’ the funds said in their request to the high court. ‘The public is watching and needs to see that, particularly when the system is under stress, the rule of law will be honored and an independent judiciary will properly scrutinize the actions of the massively powerful executive branch.’”
What those paragraphs refer to as unfair favors also just happens to be, they neglected to say, against existing U.S. contract law. In a bankruptcy, secured debtholders like the Indiana funds are supposed to get paid ahead of unsecured stakeholders like the United Auto Workers union. A little thing like following the law doesn’t seem to matter to some of Obama’s
Hence, the suit.
Only time will tell if the United States still has three fully functioning, co-equal branches of government or if the Legislative and Judicial Branches will just continue to roll over and play dead before a stunningly swift power grab by the Executive Branch that is being played out in front of a public much more interested in date night in Paris than in adhering to the U.S. Constitution.
Stay tuned. Perhaps we do have the rule of law after all.
Oh, and thank you, Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Perhaps there’s hope for the old girl yet. I’m speaking of the United States of America. What did you think I meant?
Update. Well, folks, it lasted all of one day. On Tuesday afternoon, June 9, the Supreme Court cleared the way for Chrysler LLC’s sale to Fiat.