Separation of Powers

I know this will make me look like a conservative dick, but I’ll say it anyways. This sucks :

In the latest twist in the Bankruptcy Potboiler, the Justice Department has announced that it will waive enforcement of portions of the new bankruptcy law for Louisiana residents and some Mississippi residents. They got it right: On the eve of the effective date of the new laws, they see that the bill is a terrible mess for people who are in desperate financial trouble. Hurrah for the Justice Department for saying they will back off this terrible bill. Notice that to provide even minimal protection for people following a catastrophe, the Justice Department must offer wholesale waiver of enforcement of multiple provisions that Congress specifically put into the bill. That’s pretty strong evidence that the changes in the law are going to have a hard impact on families in trouble–including those who don’t get a special hurricane break.

In the short term, this is wonderful news for all the reasons listed above. The bankruptcy bill was a horrible bit of class warfare from a corrupt and heartless Congress, but this is a really bad precedent.

It’s the responsibility of the Justice Department(and the whole executive branch) to enforce laws, not interpret them. I’m glad that they can see how economically destructive this bill is, but the merits of our laws shouldn’t concern them. With the way our government is structured, it’s the legislature’s job to create laws. Even though I agree with the spirit of what the Justice Department is trying to do here, they have no business second guessing the wishes of Congress. If the President and Congress decide that the bankruptcy bill is unduly harsh to the victims of Hurricane Katrina (which they should), they need to get their ass in gear and pass legislation to protect those people. If they’re having trouble getting motivated, they should pretend there’s a feeding tube involved.

Of course, that’s the whole point behind this little burst of compassion from the Justice Department. Any time legislation causes this big a mess, Congress are the ones who should be cleaning it up and paying the political price that comes along with their backpedaling. The government wants to be seen doing the politically popular thing by helping the people of the Gulf region (and in the process, avoid any embarrassing headlines about the poor getting screwed by the federal government), but at the end of the day, the Republican leadership in Washington still wants to make it nearly impossible for the working poor to file for bankruptcy. If they really cared, they’d be amending the law. But that would mean admitting defeat and they can’t have that.

By announcing their intention to “waive enforcement” of certain bankruptcy laws, the Justice Department is sending the message that they’re willing to act as a “check and balance” on the authority of the Congress, but isn’t that unconstitutional? Yeah, I know they have the leeway to determine enforcement priorities, but making judgments about the laws on the books falls outside of their jurisdiction. Of course, the executive branch does have a role in limiting the power of the legislative branch in the form of the Presidential veto, but that didn’t happen here because bankruptcy “reform” was aggressively pushed by the President.

Yes, the bankruptcy bill is cruel and elitist garbage designed to make it more difficult for the lower and middle classes to escape crushing debt than giant corporations, but this is the government you voted for. If incompetent cronies are put in charge of protecting our safety, the tax code is rigged to help the rich to the detriment of people living paycheck-to-paycheck, and the absurd wedge issues are given more priority than providing for the economic and physical security of every American, well…shit happens. What did you expect?! This is the government you voted for. Next time, try to pay a little more attention before voting.

And a final note to everyone who might benefit from this. Unless I’m mistaken, these Justice Department “enforcement guidelines” can change at any time. Just because they’re giving you cover doesn’t mean that you aren’t still breaking the law. They may pretend to care about your plight, but not enough to remove the stigma of criminality from your attempts to repair your finances. If you do end up filing for bankruptcy, cross your fingers and hope they don’t change their minds.


posted by greg on October 10, 2005 @ 11:12 am

4 comments

  1. Nope. Not a dick. You’re right, this is total bullshit. Repeal it if necessary, but you can’t “wish it away” for some people…

    Comment by Mr Furious — October 10, 2005 @ 9:52 pm

  2. The worst thing about the Justice Dept.’s “waiver” for hurricane victims is that, to my understanding, they didn’t waive any of the substantive portions of the act. They only waived the requirement that debtors go through 6 months of credit counseling before they file.

    The sole reason for the waiver was to get headlines for the Bush administration that said “Justice Dept. eases new bankruptcy rules for hurricane victims” without actually doing anything to help these people (and, more pointedly, without jeopardizing even $1 the credit card companies are due).

    Comment by slim — October 11, 2005 @ 9:17 am

  3. hey! Selective enforcement is a long and proud tradition in law enforcement! Why, hookers have long enjoyed the benefits of it!

    Comment by Dave — October 11, 2005 @ 11:03 am

  4. You’ve certainly discovered a barrel of worms here. There’s probably a specific law ordering (what laws do) the Justice Department to delay or deprioritize enforcement of some laws during catastophes. I say probably, but by no means assuradly. Respect for legal process is in a bit of trouble with this administration…
    Any way, the barrel of worms is the issue of government agencies taking on the responsibilties of the legislative branch. For instance, when the EPA uses science and public comment to create regulations, they are, according to some legal philosophers, meddling in the legislative branch’s activities. The legislature should be creating the specific laws under which we live, not some government employee. Perhaps this might seem mere quibbling, but I don’t think we want some Homeland Security guy choosing the boundaries of free association. Any way, good post.

    Comment by Joe — October 14, 2005 @ 6:23 pm

Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.