Accepting for the moment that Congress authorized the issue of platinum coins at whatever value the Treasury puts on them, the act would be unconstitutional as it would abrogate the Congress’ power to coin money and regulate the value thereof. I suspect that there is legislative history in which the Congress provided some parameters to what the Treasury could do with platinum coins.
I have now read the code.
The section [section (k)] could be better worded.
It says the Secretary [of the Treasury] can issue platinum BULLION coins and PROOF platinum coins of whatever design and denomination he chooses.
It can be argued that the use of the word “bullion coins” means coins that are acquired as a store of value, not as a medium of exchange, whether or not they possess a legal tender value, and that sell for the cost of metal plus a modest premium so as to cover minting and distribution costs and possibly also a reasonable profit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullion_coin
It can also be argued that the use of the word “proof coins” means coins that are very highly polished so as to be of interest to collectors, and not as a store of value nor a medium of exchange; and commanding a larger premium over cost than a bullion coin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_coinage
The obvious meanings of these two terms COMBINED WITH the presumption that Congress would and should jealously guard its powers under the Constitution, would mean that the argument of the socialist progressives that their would be dictator has found away our system of checks and balances, should be summarily rejected by the courts.