Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Buckeyeblue

(5,504 posts)
20. The problem is the law has been on the books since 1917
Sun May 21, 2023, 01:12 PM
May 2023

That doesn't mean it's not unconstitutional. But SCOTUS has typically sided with congress/legislation. However, I couldn't find anything showing the debt ceiling law has ever been challenged, probably because it has always been extended on unanimous consent votes.

The argument is straightforward. The 14th amendment says the government must pay it's debts. The only way to do that is by issuing additional debt. And the country has always been in debt. Since there is no other means to pay our debt, the 1917 law requiring congressional approval to extend the debt ceiling is unconstitutional.

The argument against is that the 1917 law has established a tradition for the process that must be followed the increase the debt ceiling. To not have this in place would erode checks and balances established by the constitution. They would argue that a president could set a debt limit that is high enough that it wouldn't be reached for decades.

The counter to that is without an unconstitutional debt limit ceiling, there would be no ceiling assigned.

I'm not sure what other arguments there are.

I don't know the answer, but that is a new take, an appeal is to claim default is better bucolic_frolic May 2023 #1
Not sure. While I say yes, lawsuits might fly and cause RW SCOTUS to deny it and affirm the RWers. TheBlackAdder May 2023 #2
Enough. It's time to settle this. Buns_of_Fire May 2023 #3
If the shoe was on the other foot would they invoke 14th amendment ? Beachnutt May 2023 #4
In a split-second, of course. Like any good two-year-old, Buns_of_Fire May 2023 #9
The shoe is never on the other foot though. GoodRaisin May 2023 #13
Republicans depend on Democrats to save them. Turbineguy May 2023 #5
I'd greatly prefer it doesn't come to that. onenote May 2023 #6
It's only money. Tetrachloride May 2023 #7
Let's borrow and pay the bills due and Beachnutt May 2023 #8
You kind of missed the point. Who are we going to borrow from and on what terms? onenote May 2023 #18
Did you tell Republicans that when they created the debt? LakeArenal May 2023 #10
Pretty sure both parties "created the debt." onenote May 2023 #19
Invoke the 14th right after the deadline LostOne4Ever May 2023 #11
I believe he has to do whatever he has to do to KentuckyWoman May 2023 #12
Do the discharge petition first, and if that fails, then the 14th amendment JohnSJ May 2023 #14
If there are unknown or unclear possible serious risks nevergiveup May 2023 #15
I trust that he'll do whaever he needs to do to keep us from defaulting. GoCubsGo May 2023 #16
I say yes standingtall May 2023 #17
The problem is the law has been on the books since 1917 Buckeyeblue May 2023 #20
He said he won't Polybius May 2023 #21
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Should President Biden in...»Reply #20