3 ms·
No. That'd be considered an unconstitutional "taking" of the economic rights from people relying on those contractual terms. See Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel, 5
by dlgeek 7y ago
No. That'd be considered an unconstitutional "taking" of the economic rights from people relying on those contractual terms. See Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel, 524 U.S. 498 (1998).
- derefr 7y agoRe: that judgement, why is the stock market allowed to halt trading? For that matter, why are savings banks allowed to restrict access to their customers' savings during bank runs? Wouldn't people have the "economic right" to de-leverage [and thereby kill] these institutions in these situations?
- momo-reina 7y agoYou don’t own the money you deposit in the banks, the banks do. Through the act of depositing you are lending the banks your money, therefore it’s not your money anymore. They can default on the loan. See https://thehutchreport.com/your-bank-account-who-really-owns-the-money-hint-its-not-you/ https://thehutchreport.com/your-bank-account-who-really-owns... Or read https://www.amazon.com/Where-Does-Money-Come-Ryan-Collins/dp/1521043892 https://www.amazon.com/Where-Does-Money-Come-Ryan-Collins/dp... Highly recommended.
- hirsin 7y agoJust like Facebook doesn't have to respect your First Amendment rights, neither do other private enterprises like banks and stock markets need to respect your "economic rights"
- pjc50 7y agoNeither of those is the government. That ruling only applies to government action.