Three states have joined a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform & Consumer Protection Act.

On Sept. 20, South Carolina, Michigan, and Oklahoma joined a lawsuit challenging the legality of the financial reform act. Their complaint argues that the “Orderly Liquidation Authority” granted to the Treasury Secretary under Title II of the act “violates the separation of powers.”

In a conference call with reporters on Friday, Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma’s attorney general, said legislators used the 2008 financial crisis “to concentrate power in Washington, DC.” He argued that the bill is incompatible with the US constitutional system and its framework of checks and balances.

The lawsuit, he said, is about the “fundamental concept of making sure that our Constitutional framework is upheld.”

The act gives the treasury secretary the power to liquidate financial institutions “with little or no advance warning, under cover of mandatory secrecy, and without either useful statutory guidance or meaningful legislative, executive, or judicial oversight,” the filed complaint states.

Each state has pension funds in institutions regulated by the act, the complaint states, which are exposed to harm if the treasury secretary liquidates a bank. Each state is “ultimately liable” for the pension funds, so if the pension funds lose value because of actions permitted under Title II, the states could be forced to absorb the losses.

The states also argue that Title II violates the Due Process clause of the Fifth Amendment and the requirement in Article One of the Constitution that bankruptcy laws be “uniform.”

Alan Wilson, attorney general for South Carolina, said during the conference call that under Dodd-Frank states lose the constitutional protections they enjoyed under prior bankruptcy law.

Adam White, an attorney with Boyden Gray & Associates, told the Washington Free Beacon that before Dodd-Frank there was a substantial body of bankruptcy law and tradition that made bankruptcy proceedings transparent.

After Dodd-Frank, however, “states will not have any of the protections of bankruptcy law that they had before,” he said.

Bankruptcy law “has turned into a black box” under Dodd-Frank, said Boyden Gray during the conference call.

The states’ allegations of harm due to losses in pension value are hypothetical, which could open them to charges of bringing a premature suit.

However, White said, the “states are injured right now because on the face of the law, Dodd-Frank has removed the rights they used to have” under bankruptcy law. This loss of rights means they have standing under Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution, which restricts the Court’s jurisdiction to actual “cases” and “controversies.”

Further, White said, the states have no choice but to bring their constitutional claims before any financial institutions are liquidated. Because Dodd-Frank restricts judicial review so severely, he said, there has to be a “pre-liquidation challenge or there’s no challenge at all.”

READ FULL SOURCE ARTICLE


The BasicsProject.org informational and educational pamphlet series is now available for Kindle and iPad. Click here to find out more...

The New Media Journal and BasicsProject.org are not funded by outside sources. We exist exclusively on tax deductible donations from our readers and contributors. Please make a tax deductible donation today.