Posted on 07/23/2013 11:12:28 AM PDT by ken5050
OK..I'm not a lawyer...haven't even stayed at a Holiday Inn Express in over a decade, and apologies to all in advance if this a dumb question. But I know there are lots of smart folks, even smart lawyers, here.
I gather that some 20 other states have similar laws on the books.
But doesn't that violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment, which says that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
After all, the Michigan statute doesn't say that the state is forced to pony up the $$ to fund Detroit's public pensions..just that they can't be changed.
So, aren't the citizens who work for private entities entitled to the same?
If it is not bonded debt, which for most states is the only permitted debt, I would think the actual issue would be separation of powers: Can a previous administration detail the actions of a future administration? If that is the case, couldn’t it apply to all facets of local and state government? Force in a 50 year budget that every future administration is tied to?
I suspect federal bankruptcy law controls as to the State Constitution.
For example, if I owe you $100 and the state constitution says it can’t be changed, it can still be discharged in bankruptcy court.
The GM “bankruptcy” proved that the law says what the regime wants it to say.
And this was further solidified by Roberts' opinion in the Obamacare ruling. We no longer have a functioning Constitution, so any discussions thereof is moot. We might as well be arguing how many Obamas can dance on the head of a pin.
It was ludicrous in the first place for units of government to guarantee the pensions. In private industry pension contributions by both employee and employer are made into third party pension funds and employer contributions generally cease once the employee leaves or retires. Employees then draw off this accumulated fund for their pensions. As I understand what is happening is that these retirees are basically still on the payroll of the unit of government when they retire so that the government is paying not only current employees who are providing services, but also retirees until they die. It begs the question where all that pension money went in Detroit.
under obamacare, i heard, muslims amish and native american are exempt. so much for equal protection
Into campaign coffers. Guess which party benefited.
My concern is the fact that we the people aren’t protected from public sector unions. We’re held hostage to their demands.
Well,
(1) Since states and municipalities may not legally incur off-balance sheet debt and
(2) Since unfunded pension obligations and other non-bonded “contractual” obligations ARE in fact off-balance sheet debt and
(3) Since Detroit’s “outside” legal counsel allowed Detroit to illegaly create those obligations by failing to fund those future payment liabilities with current-period deposits calculated by professional actuaries,
It follows that Detroit’s “outside” legal counsel is LIABLE for those missing deposits now. It will probably be necessary to ‘claw back’ payments made to the “outside” counsel’s ‘partners’ — going back several years.
I can’t tell you how sad that makes me...
************************************************
Maybe the mayors symbol of power can lend a clue .. lets take a look..
Democrats have been fighting against Equal Protection since 1824. So this is one part of the Constitution that they will continue to ignore.
Equal protection clause? What’s that? Constitution? Huh?
Murder by abortion — now *that’s* equal protection. /s
Thanks ken5050.
Regarding the state lawsuit to halt the Detroit bankruptcy, the federal bankruptcy judge ruled today that “... federal courts will decide if Detroit is eligible for bankruptcy, staying challenges to the bankruptcy in state court.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.