I find the reporting on this interesting: The United States government told lower courts that this could create big problems. It could lead to countries choosi

I find the reporting on this interesting: The United States government told lower courts that this could create big problems. It could lead to countries choosing to borrow under English law, rather than New York law... Most of those arguing for Argentina are arguing that it would be good policy to let them force restructuring. But: There is no legal procedure to resolve debts of destitute countries. There is no court to approve a restructuring plan that will wipe out some debts and convert others to equity, as there is for companies. The court essentially said that making policy isn't their job - only enforcing the law is. I find it quite odd that the article and many of the parties involved almost seem to assume that the court should be making law from the bench. At least, that's the impression I get from the article.