Chuck Schumer: 14th Amendment Option 'Certainly Worth Exploring'

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Friday that invoking the Constitution's 14th Amendment, which states that federal debts "shall not be questioned," to continue paying government obligations is a strategy worth considering should a debt-ceiling deal remain elusive.

In late May, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner read directly from the 14th Amendment to a crowd of reporters, emphasizing the clause "shall not be questioned." And rank-and-file Senate Democrats are increasingly looking to the 14th Amendment as a way out of the debt-ceiling impasse, as HuffPost reported on Tuesday.

When asked about the Constitution's 14th Amendment during a conference call with reporters, Schumer, who leads Senate Democrats' communications effort, said, "It's certainly worth exploring."

But he warned the amendment would probably not come into play during the current debate over the government's congressionally imposed debt limit. "It needs a little more exploration and study," he said. "It's probably not ripe to pursue at this time, because it hasn't had that study and you wouldn't want to just go ahead and issue the debt and have one of the courts reverse it."

Legal scholars, however, argue that the courts couldn’t get involved because no party would have standing to sue. In order to have standing, a plaintiff needs to demonstrate that they have been harmed. Only Congress would have a plausible complaint, and the Senate would not agree to go along with such a suit.

Individual members of Congress, however, may be able to gain standing and challenge the president. But it is difficult to imagine that the current Supreme Court, one of the most pro-business in the past century, would hand down a ruling that dramatically harms Wall Street.

Schumer said that the next time the debt ceiling needs to be raised, the 14th Amendment option would get a close look. "It's something worth looking at for the next time around, but I don't think it's had enough fermentation -- examination, to employ at this time."

Comments

[Highly Opinionated]

06:04 PM on 07/14/2011

Chuckie Schumer and the constitution. Wow. Hard to picture this....Trying to think of something to compare.....How about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Bible? Just baffling isn't it?

[ConservativeAmongWolves]

11:01 PM on 07/03/2011

"It's worth exploring" because nothing else is working for the Dems. With a President who couldn't lead them out of a wet paper bag, they are in disarray.

[xsdfddgf]

07:37 PM on 07/03/2011

We're always mindful of fashion that's in it for the long haul - those pieces you grab and go without fail every time, that, like a good friend, just couldn't be more reliable. Though a trendy handbag is a fun choice for, say, an evening out, an everyday bag that meets your everyday needs is a wardrobe must. We're eyeing neutral bags that move from month to month with ease, that suit every possibility with style and that make your life much easier with a host of functional details. Check them out:
http://www.bsafebiz.com

(air jordan, air max, shox tn, rift, puma, dunk sb, adidas) nike jordan shoes 1-24 $32
lv, coach, chane bag $35
COOGI(jeans, tshirts, hoody, jacket) $30
christian audigier(jeans, tshirts, hoody) $13
edhardy(shoes, tshirts, jeans, caps, watche, handbag) $25
Armani(jeans, tshirts,) $24
AF(jeans, coat, hoody, sweater, tshirts)Abercrombie & Fitch $31

http://www.bsafebiz.com

[djaikins]

05:31 PM on 07/03/2011

Invoke the 14th amendment. If the situation were reversed, do you think the republicans would even think twice about doing it?

[ConservativeAmongWolves]

11:02 PM on 07/03/2011

Invoke Obama's authority to do what? Sell debt? Who would buy it.

The House of Representatives is the only authorized taxing and spending entity in the Constitution.

[thetruth92802]

12:00 PM on 07/03/2011

Obama’s Osama Cover Up

[Brian Gilmer]

01:28 PM on 07/03/2011

How did he get AQ to go along with it and announce a new leader?

[thetruth92802]

11:54 AM on 07/03/2011

No doubt the President and the Democrat party have been exposed for what they are worth, great bloviators. The MSM is in a predicament they have not previously been in, having to criticize the President and their beloved Democrat party, my oh my! Times have changed. With the smartest man in the world running the country and the smartest woman in the world running the State department how could things have gone so wrong? Now the Democrats are starting to tell us it is the Republicans fault, that they are deliberately trying to ruin the country and the economy, who has been in since charge since 08, and still control the Senate and WH? Better change that tune boys, it ain't going to sell this time.

[cancer puppy]

11:37 AM on 07/03/2011

The clause at issue in the 14th amendment is about the validity of existing debt. It is sad when people are not able to remember the beginning of a long sentence by the time they have work their way through to the end of the sentence. It's only the validity that cannot be questioned. What we cannot do is call up China and say "What's this? I don't remember putting that on our grand-children's credit card"

We cannot refute what we owe but we not be able to pay it back, we might not be able to borrow more, we might choose not to borrow more ( if we can find more responsible representation), but those are all, very clearly, different things.

[ConservativeAmongWolves]

11:04 PM on 07/03/2011

The US has plenty of existing tax revenue to pay the debt service. This is about the Dems wanting to finance next years deficit THIS YEAR, before Obama has to run on his record.

[aaronshomeinspe]

09:59 AM on 07/03/2011

What the H&%% do you mean the next time? It sounds like they have already decided not to try saving some money to solve the debt problem. I say vote OUT all those who are not trying to find ways to save money and then reinvent the geatine for those who want to cut back or end Social Security. Money that we banked on a promise from or government that it would be there for us when we retired. It is not the governments money it is ours, and they have dipped into it for their special projects. I'm sick of our poliititions (both republican and democrat) lieing to me to drain my pockets for their special under the table projects. Next year could be our last chance to stop these bloodsuckers and put an end to the rising socialisim in our country. I say forget your party lines and do the right thing for our country next year, but don't wait until then to let them know you are not happy.

[sixchair]

09:28 AM on 07/03/2011

Is it possible that the authors of the Constitution foresaw the possibility of a political party like the Banana Republicans holding the country hostage by refusing to acknowledge the nation's debt as a way to force an unacceptable agenda through congress? Wow, geniuses in 1776 giving us 1 simple phrase to protect the country. Wow.

[Berettasskeeter]

05:50 PM on 07/04/2011

Can anyone here name a single person who is "refusing to acknowledge the nation's debt"? I haven't heard a one of them. And please, ensure the vocabulary at least means the exact same thing, even if the words are a bit different?!!
Semepr fi

[sixchair]

08:49 PM on 07/04/2011

That's spelled "Semper", Mr. Exact Same Thing...

[cancer puppy]

08:01 AM on 07/03/2011

You have to work real hard to deceive yourself to the point that you can believe the 14th gives the president the authority to borrow money without the authorization of the people's representatives.

Now can the executive take us to war and borrow money to pay for it without any support or approval from we the people? That is not a hired executive that's a king and a completely different form of government.

Our government is not allowed to invalidate or even question the validity of our debt, and it's not allowed to take on more debt without the permission of the people, who's children are going to have to repay it.

[sixchair]

09:21 AM on 07/03/2011

no, it's about honoring previous debt. this takes the teeth out of the Banana Republicans' threats. doesn't it make you sad that the only way the BR's can even hope to get their bizarre ideas through is to threaten the destruction of the country they so claim to love?

[ConservativeAmongWolves]

11:17 PM on 07/03/2011

First off, the Left media's portrayal of this impasse leading to default is bogus. There is no risk of default on the EXISTING NATIONAL DEBT.....we have plenty of EXISTING tax revenue to pay it.....PERIOD.

BUT.....since the Feds have to borrow 44% of the money that it spends, it could impact the normal spending.

[djaikins]

07:33 AM on 07/03/2011

Actually, it is not only worth exploring, it it worth implementing. Let the republicans oppose it and drive another nail in their respect coffins.

[sixchair]

09:30 AM on 07/03/2011

Amen. Please see my post above.

[sixchair]

09:30 AM on 07/03/2011

er, above the above...

[JerseyDevil1]

05:17 AM on 07/03/2011

OH...here we go...is Chuckie going to FINALLY consider the Constitution...ONLY if he can find a way to further distort the original meaning?

[sixchair]

09:22 AM on 07/03/2011

i think it's pretty clear. the US is good for its debt.

[Berettasskeeter]

05:51 PM on 07/04/2011

That isn't what it says!
Semper fi

[userw014]

09:10 AM on 07/02/2011

One interpretation I can see of this is that the US Government MUST pay off existing debts, as represented by bonds. It's not so clear about pensions - those seem to be qualified by pensions (and bounties) incurred for services in suppressing incursion or rebellion. Given that we've been overturning established (if vile) governments in the middle east, those pensions (and bounties) don't seem to qualify.

If anything, this clause MIGHT give the executive or the courts the authority to raise taxes (or print money) to satisfy exising debts.

[Dangerous Dan]

01:28 AM on 07/03/2011

And the key word is EXISTING.your deadbeat spouse has run up a tab YOU are responsible for.
Cut the credit cards up, give them a LIMITED allowance.
Dig your way out.

[ConservativeAmongWolves]

11:19 PM on 07/03/2011

If the Congress and the President can raise or cut the benefits for Soc Sec and Medicare, then those programs are programs, not bonded indebtedness.

[parlimentMike]

08:34 AM on 07/02/2011

Long before that it says that the House controls spending.

[sharin]

08:55 AM on 07/02/2011

as in: where the money is spent. One does not negate the other

[John Ison]

10:46 AM on 07/02/2011

you forget - the debt has already been appropriated and approved by both the House and the Senate - That's the problem with this whole debate - they've already said spend the money once but now they're trying to go back on their word - That's why this is such a circular arguement. They need to just raise it and get serious about intelligent management of the budget and economy based on both expenditures and revenues.

[Brian Gilmer]

11:39 AM on 07/02/2011

This is like contracting to have a house build but when it is done telling the builder that you don't feel like borrowing the money to pay him.

[parlimentMike]

02:20 PM on 07/02/2011

You make an excellent point

[DonJuan1943]

07:42 AM on 07/02/2011

The goal of The Republicans is to make Obama a one term President. The strategy of The Republicans is to shut down the government; and make it look like it's Obama's fault. The GOP will not negotiate in good faith on the issue. So, Obama will have to use executive authority to save the marketplace from the catastrophic effects of the shutdown. When Obama uses the "Constitutional solution" to the debt crisis, the GOP will shriek about Obama using the tactics of a "Socialist dictator".

We will embark on a Constitutional Crisis; a battle between The Executive Branch and the Conservative Supreme Court. Congress will become useless (not uncommon for them); individual members being relegated to guest spots on "Dancing With The Stars", "America's Got Talent", and "Good Morning Amerika". I love a good circus.

[warrenagv]

09:04 AM on 07/02/2011

That should be the goal of america He has screwed up every thing he did so far

[Brian Gilmer]

11:40 AM on 07/02/2011

Like killing Osama? I guess that Bush got it right by letting him escape from Tora-Bora.

[sixchair]

09:35 AM on 07/03/2011

Everything? That word proves you partisan ign.ora.nce. Rescued the auto industry. That's just one, so you're wrong.

It's a fact, that's what Mcconell said. The Banana Republicans have prevented anything they could from happening. Are you like them, that electing GOP is so important that you're willing to crah the country. My guess is yes. And shame on you if it is.

[aaronshomeinspe]

10:24 AM on 07/03/2011

Sounds just like what the Demos did while Bush was in office. I guess it is alright if they do it but not when the Repubs do it. As far as I'm concerned this is why our government can't get anything done. And what really gets me is how many voters want this to go on as long as they think their side is winning. America is the side I'm on not some worthless party. And until we start voting to force our representatives to work together we are going nowhere. And might I mention how our competition (China, India, etc) loves the way our government has not worked for the last 16 to 18 years because of petty bipartisanship.