This is the part that really caught me off guard in the opinion. Folks rightly focus on, well, the top-line. But this is just a complete misunderstanding of executive privilege or where it comes from, and is patently, grossly invented for one man and for one case
Everybody makes jokes about ordering drone strikes on Mar-a-Lago, etc. which is obviously insane.
But Biden should be using the ruling to "fire a shot across the bow" on some policy matters, if only to highlight the extent of SCOTUS' partisan corruption.
I think it would be hilarious if he had the 6 conservative SCOTUS justices’ catalytic converters stolen, refined, and minted into a coin that erased a significant fraction of the national debt.
It doesn’t work—part of the problem with a creative solution is that the legal uncertainty itself would have calamitous effects, even if you’re ultimately vindicated. But don’t put anything past this court either
So my longer argument is that its value as an idea (versus, say, a 14A claim to blow past the limit) is precisely that it sidesteps the calamitous uncertainty of going past the debt ceiling by any other means
I think you can even make a pretty non-trivial argument he should do it /outside/ of a debt-ceiling fight (but as a practical matter, they never would)
It would give the justices time to try selling coin bits for $0.167 trillion and then announce how they’re accepting openly ridiculous claims of standing from persons harmed by having a solvent government in order to reverse Trump v. US
Nope. Oddly enough, you could mint a $100 quadrillion coin, hell, a $100 quadrillion coin every single day, and it would have *zero* effect on inflation.
Can think about it like this if you want to: If Congress passed a law saying everyone gets a $1m check in the post, but also that the check is uncashable, then everyone is technically a millionaire now, but because nobody can spend it, it's effectively just mailing everyone a bit of paper
it doesn't change the value of anyone's "spendable" money. You can't even borrow against it, because it has no future value. So it's just an elaborate accounting fiction, not an economic event.
This, except unironically. You know if Trump gets in office he’s going to print money and give it to himself. Or he’s going to ignore the 1974 Impoundment law and just take money from blue states or blue members of Congress or Ukraine or... Get the SC to declare this illegal now.
