« Two parties leave this world, but neither really matters | Main | Has the crackdown on money-laundering hit the average Mexican? »

June 16, 2015


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Watch the decision get appealed instanter. It's totally wackballs.

Alternate take: The courts are here to interpret and enforce the law, rather than to create policy outcomes (even necessary ones.) The government and the Fed clearly did go out of their way to gain control over a non-bank in a way that they really weren't authorized to do by statute. If we feel that shareholders in "systemically important" entities need to get wiped out in case of a similar circumstance, then the answer is not to pretend that the law is otherwise, but to change it.

Not really. Courts have long held that governments, state and federal, are not limited by their enumerated powers as long as no rights have been violated or statutory limits overstepped. This judge somehow concluded that rights were violated although no harm was done, something which really makes no sense.

There is also a practical issue regarding Congress, but I agree with you that granting more power to the executive is a second-best result. Although it's the one we have and likely the only way to save the Republic from itself.

I say that in the full knowledge that Scott Walker has a significant chance of being the next President of the United States.

The comments to this entry are closed.