[only1percent]

yes but under bankruptcy rules creditors have a right of redress if they are being treated differently than other members of the same class.

If it turns out that dealers who are the wrong skin color or made the wrong political contributions are being specifically targeted, then they can go to the bankrupcy juge.

Obama was trying to prevent that so he could imperially order the reorganization according to his left wing communist vision.

Yes and no. The Bankruptcy Code permits you pick and choose which "executory contracts" (including franchise agreements) you "reject" (break) and which ones you don't. Everyone whose executory contract was rejected gets their (specially calculated) claim treated equally with those other unsecured creditors ... but the problem is that Chrysler doesn't have enough value to provide any recovery to its unsecured creditors. The recovery that the VEBA trustee (the UAW health benefit account) is getting is in theory related to future concessions as well as past claims.

In theory, if someone could prove that Chrysler was motivated by bias against a protected minority in choosing who to reject, the Court might do something about that. However, whites aren't a protected minority. And political status isn't a protected classification at all. In any event, the burden of proof would be sky-high.

[El Gato]

In theory, if someone could prove that Chrysler was motivated by bias against a protected minority in choosing who to reject, the Court might do something about that.

White, Cuban, and/or Asian Republicans are not a protected minority.