We have double the 14th problem

We now have doubts that we can get government agencies on cash flow.

Cash flow is a pit adjustment tool, and it allows a measurable bankruptcy queue. There is good reason the classical view of the 14th would prohibit distributing out the S to L accounts in the agencies. The Supremes might counter that the 14th safeguards against sub branches of the executive executing trades in the money markets.

More Constitutional Nightmares  pop up, and sandbox going forward. We are at Egads! Seriously, we need a clean path to get Swift involved and that means resolving this particular complexity.

Instead of Roberts, we have Thomas

Let us correct the 1935 decision, that was an error. The 14th really implies that debt be subjected to market discipline in the current technology. Gets us back to quantum mechanical, we can show the necessity of a bankruptcy leak, the need to market price existing debt. That is justification, all around. The Supremes heed Corrector, not  Creator. The underlying problem, the 14th is mostly nutty.

The Thomas decision is more of a narrowing of the 1935 decision. It introduces the term, relative to current technology, expecting some relitigation. .We can show, to our current best knowledge, debt is sacred to the extent we get warning of failure. The right to coin is still implied, the danger of government failure must be measured. This is the legal equivalent of,"This time is mostly like all the other times", the sandbox going full commie rat with its own 14th exclusion.