4 ms·

To be clear, it is not unconstitutional for the federal government to do so. The contract clause only restrains the states.

xyzzyz 6y ago
That depends on what word “unconstitutional” means. Would people who originally wrote the constitution consider it unconstitutional for federal government to do it? Almost surely, yes: they wrote an explicit list of things the federal government can do, and if something was not on the list, it was understood that the federal government cannot do it. Of course, in early 20th century this has all been thrown through the window by the Progressive era Supreme Court, and contrary to intent of the framers of the constitution, it became clear that nothing restrains federal government other than what a group of nine says, and even that is not always true.
- Finnucane 6y ago
  In this case the language of the Contracts Clause is entirely clear that it applies to the states.
  - mattkrause 6y ago
    To put it more bluntly, it literally starts with the words "No State shall...." If you want to go all originalist, the point was to prohibit private bills benefiting a specific person, which is almost the opposite of what's proposed here.
    - Finnucane 6y ago
      Well, we know the founders were all like, this is final word, we have foreseen all contingencies, if you ever do anything we wouldn’t like we will haunt you from the grave.
  - xyzzyz 6y ago
    You missed the point. Of course the Contracts Clause applies to the states and not to the federal government. The point here is that there is no need for Contracts Clause applying to federal government to exist, because the federal government cannot do what the Contracts Clauses forbids the states anyway. Of course, that's the theory. In practice, the federal government can do literally anything it wants as long as it uses magic incantations of "General Welfare" and "Commerce Clause", and as long as the nine guys in SCOTUS accept that, regardless of what the authors of constitution meant for federal government to be able to do.
    - Finnucane 6y ago
      What would forbid the Feds from doing it?
      - xyzzyz 6y ago
        The fact that it's not on the explicit list of things feds are allowed to do.

xyzzyz 6y ago

That depends on what word “unconstitutional” means. Would people who originally wrote the constitution consider it unconstitutional for federal government to do it? Almost surely, yes: they wrote an explicit list of things the federal government can do, and if something was not on the list, it was understood that the federal government cannot do it. Of course, in early 20th century this has all been thrown through the window by the Progressive era Supreme Court, and contrary to intent of the framers of the constitution, it became clear that nothing restrains federal government other than what a group of nine says, and even that is not always true.

Finnucane 6y ago
In this case the language of the Contracts Clause is entirely clear that it applies to the states.
- mattkrause 6y ago
  To put it more bluntly, it literally starts with the words "No State shall...." If you want to go all originalist, the point was to prohibit private bills benefiting a specific person, which is almost the opposite of what's proposed here.
  - Finnucane 6y ago
    Well, we know the founders were all like, this is final word, we have foreseen all contingencies, if you ever do anything we wouldn’t like we will haunt you from the grave.
- xyzzyz 6y ago
  You missed the point. Of course the Contracts Clause applies to the states and not to the federal government. The point here is that there is no need for Contracts Clause applying to federal government to exist, because the federal government cannot do what the Contracts Clauses forbids the states anyway. Of course, that's the theory. In practice, the federal government can do literally anything it wants as long as it uses magic incantations of "General Welfare" and "Commerce Clause", and as long as the nine guys in SCOTUS accept that, regardless of what the authors of constitution meant for federal government to be able to do.
  - Finnucane 6y ago
    What would forbid the Feds from doing it?
    - xyzzyz 6y ago
      The fact that it's not on the explicit list of things feds are allowed to do.