Skip to comments.Judge Rules That Detroit Bankruptcy Filing Is Unconstitutional
Posted on 07/19/2013 2:23:28 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
click here to read article
“I believe bankruptcy court is a federal jurisdiction:”
Correct. The judge has no authority on this issue.
That judge is using North Korea type talk.
I agree. The federal supremacy clause of the Constitution pre-empts state jurisdiction over bankruptcy filings. This is so clear that I believe this is a publicity stunt to help the judge run for some statewide elective office.
I hesitate to criticize further than this...
Your company, indeed, ALL private companies, are required by Federal law to fund retirement pay as you go, no exceptions under penalty of huge fines and jail time.
Municipalities and counties and all "public service" agencies have no such obligation demanded by law.
Absurd, ignorant, ridiculous and incorrect comparison!
I don't expect public elected officials, past and present, will be subject to heavy fines and serious jail time.
What happens if they dis-incorporate the city? There would no longer be a "political subdivision" to apply the statue to.
I would imagine said judge will not be getting a paycheck because of the bankruptcy?
No wonder she wants to “rule” it unconstitutional.
It's been many years since I was a 1st year law student, and many things you learn then are later found to be untrue -- to put it mildly.
You need to Look at 11 U.S.C 109 "Who May be A Debtor". Unlike chapter 7, 13, and 11, which are generally open to anyone, a municipality may only file a Chapter 9, and then only if the laws of its state permit it. See 11 U.S.C. 109(c)(2):
[A city may file under Ch 9 if it] " is specifically authorized, in its capacity as a municipality or by name, to be a debtor under such chapter by State law, or by a governmental officer or organization empowered by State law to authorize such entity to be a debtor under such chapter....
It gets a little murky after that because I would clearly interpret this issue, that is whether the entity that signed the petition was authorized to do so, as a "core matter" over which the bankruptcy court has sole and exclusive jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C 157(b)(2)(A). Opinions on that point could vary, but that's where the argument will focus, on whether this is a core matter or not. If my opinion is correct, the state court order is a nullity, and the bankruptcy judge will have the task of determining if the filing was authorized under state law.
That would be my solution too, although the rate may not be high enough. ANY pension shortfall can be resolved if you set the rate high enough. Maybe liberal judges will rule you can't reduce their compensation, but no liberal would rule to establish a precedent that you can't tax anything as much as government wants. John Roberts on ObamaCare provides the Supreme backstop. Invoke withholding and collect it before the pensioners get their cut. But if you really think like a lib there's an even easier way. Remember the KC, Mo. School District desegregation judge? He just imposed the taxes himself; however high he felt were needed. Invoke those cases and dare people in Detroit to call them racist.
Ignorant" Ridiculous? sorry bro but I don't subscribe to that when it comes to any employee's financial retirement future..........
You try to take away from me what I worked my lifetime for and I'll hunt you down and burn your house down..........after I shoot you.
What provision of 362 did she violate? I agree with your conclusion about who has exclusive jurisdiction to decide the filing issue, but this is not a stay violation.
Just Northish of Detwaa is Oakland County run by Republican L Brooks Patterson. Guess what, they have a AAA bond rating. Why? He got the Union types to go along with MSA's ( @ the time mid 90's ) and a 401a. The difference between this County and Detroit is staggering. If the Union guys went for it back then, why didn't Detwaa adopt Patterson's model.....
That is the million dollar question...
Are you a "public employee?"
If I were, I would be right there alongside you.
I know of a small town city council meeting where the treasurer reported on the bank account. She reported the cash in the account and the outstanding checks. One of the council members did not understand that the true balance was what was left after the checks clear. She kept insisting they spend money of some crap and just couldn’t understand why they were telling her there was no money. Of course, she accused the rest of the members of racism. This is what we’re up against everywhere, folks. Including congress.
No I'm not, I spent my life in private industry.
It doesn't really matter if it's the public or private, you spent your entire life working for either one with a contractual guarantee of a pension. Take it away or cut it would be disasterous for the majority of people who planned their lives on their pensions.
Does that mean that I support the public sector pension and healthcare plans? Absolutely not, especially since I have funded them with my tax dollars. But it is what it is, change them going foreward but don't destroy the lives of those people who worked for what they are receiving..........
As a side note, even my own past employer changed their pension plan and healthcare structure for new employees back in the early 2000's. Pensions would be contributory and healthcare would not be offered following retirement. That became a non-issue when the plants were closed down and the corporation itself was sold off to a Canadian manufacturing group who ultimately released all associated employees.
This is just part of the Judge’s reelection campaign. She knows she has no jurisdiction here.
“The state judge violated the automatic stay provisions of the Bankruptcy Code by purporting to issue an order. Once the bankruptcy petition is filed, the bankruptcy court has exclusive jurisdiction unless or until the stay is lifted or the bankruptcy judge dismisses the bankruptcy petition. The state judge is actually in contempt of the bankruptcy court. Her order is a nullity”
Bingo. BK was all ready filed and only the BK court can change things. The plaintiffs will have to state their case in BK court.
I'm completely familiar with the PBGC since I was the administrator of my company's UAW pension plan and a recipient of my company's non-contributory DB plan.
With that being said, I still stand by my statement