US Obligation to pay Bonds & Interest when due

I researched what would be the authority of Obama & Company to decline to pay either interest or principal on government bonds.

It would be a direct violation of the US Constitution and the Supreme Court not to pay both the principal an interest when due. In the order of US obligations, these are considered to be contract obligations, where as spending on such things as Social Security and Medicare, etc., are not contract obligations.

The Constitution controls with Article 1 Section 8, plus the 14th Amendment.

Perry v. United States, 1935, controls with respect to the payment of contractual obligations, such as US Treasury Bonds, etc. The case makes it clear that the US Government is obligated to pay them, both principal and interest, when due.

Flemming v. Nestor, 1960, makes it clear that Social Security, and by implication all similar spending, is not contractual.

Taken as a whole, if the government runs out of money, they must prioritize based on what income is coming in. In making that priority, the government must pay the contractual obligations first. There is more than sufficient daily revenue, about more than 6 times what is needed, to pay these contractual obligations.

If the administration would decline to pay these contractual obligations, it would violate the Constitution and a ruling by the Supreme Court. If the administration did in fact decline to pay these contractual obligations, you would hear immediate calls for Impeachment. The grounds for Impeachment would be valid.

Tynda wrote:I researched what would be the authority of Obama & Company to decline to pay either interest or principal on government bonds.

It would be a direct violation of the US Constitution and the Supreme Court not to pay both the principal an interest when due. In the order of US obligations, these are considered to be contract obligations, where as spending on such things as Social Security and Medicare, etc., are not contract obligations.

The Constitution controls with Article 1 Section 8, plus the 14th Amendment.

Perry v. United States, 1935, controls with respect to the payment of contractual obligations, such as US Treasury Bonds, etc.  The case makes it clear that the US Government is obligated to pay them, both principal and interest, when due.

Flemming v. Nestor, 1960, makes it clear that Social Security, and by implication all similar spending, is not contractual.

Taken as a whole, if the government runs out of money, they must prioritize based on what income is coming in.  In making that priority, the government must pay the contractual obligations first.  There is more than sufficient daily revenue, about more than 6 times what is needed, to pay these contractual obligations.

If the administration would decline to pay these contractual obligations, it would violate the Constitution and a ruling by the Supreme Court.  If the administration did in fact decline to pay these contractual obligations, you would hear immediate calls for Impeachment.  The grounds for Impeachment would be valid.

This tyrant has shown no respect for the Rule of Law or the Constitution. He will do damn well what he pleases. The only thing that could stop him is impeachment, but with an obsequious Senate that would not convict, the tyrant is free to work his will. He reminds me of Andrew Jackson who commenting on Worcester v Georgia, a case concerning the Cherokees sovereignty over their lands, supposedly stated "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!"