“The rule of law requires that like people be treated alike and that people know what the law is so that they can plan their lives in accord with the law. In this case, a law is being passed to impose taxes on a particular, politically unpopular group. That is a tyrannical abuse of Congress’s powers. And in addition, it is retroactive legislation, changing the law upon which AIG and its employees had relied. As James Madison wrote in Federalist 62, “It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws . . . undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is to-day, can guess what it will be to-morrow.”Selective taxation is tyranny. Ex post facto legislation violates the spirit of the liberal order, even if a particular piece of legislation can be “structured” to pass constitutional muster.”
David Boaz at the Cato Institute web-page
On the other hand, Lawrence Tribe, at The Atlantic, who is on President Obama’s legal team, thinks the taxation can be structured so as to avoid constitutional objections (challenges as a violation of due process and a bill of attainder).
Comment:
Are they serious?
The rule of law requires that like people be treated alike and that people know what the law is so that they can plan their lives in accordance.
This same Congress has just dumped the follies, fraud, and recklessness of the entire financial industry on the laps of the population, regardless of whether they had anything to do with it, hustling the whole thing through with propaganda and distortion at every turn, has destroyed the economy, continues down the same path of redistributing the wealth of the public (present and future) to the very people most responsible for destroying it, with nary a thought for the constitution and now, lo and behold, niceties of law are an insuperable objection.
Fine. Under law, interpreted constitutionally, one could as well say the entire financial industry turned fraudulent in the past few decades and was acting criminally, so no contracts from the period are valid to begin with, let alone bonuses.
Rather than taxes, call it a penalty or fine.
The bonus system has been forced on corporate America because of government intervention regarding ‘Executive Pay.’ An issue that should be between the board and the stock holders.
How many different ways can the government stop people from making money? What right do they have?
If AIG had filed bankruptcy, those contractual obligations would’ve been void. But the Statists wouldn’t have been able to seize one of the largest corporations on Earth. (while giving the bill to the taxpayer)
Cato is like a traffic cop on valium. They’re about as useful as…
You have to love the irony in the whole thing as you pointed out in the
comment part. You can’t write fiction this unbelievable. The only way it
could have read better if Lawrence Tribe’s character was played by Alan
Dershowitz.
I read “Saving Private Enterprise: Paul, Petraeus, and Two Kinds of
Patriotism” and while I might take a little longer to swallow it all
regarding Petraeus, I found it to be truly original thought and I agree with
the evaluations regarding the collectivist mentality.
Ya I know I’m reading 2 year old essays. I’m a little behind. Late to the
party so to speak. Thanks for the brain food.
Peace,
Keith Snyder
The People’s Republic of New York