• Free Speech & Social Media
      • Privacy & Surveillance
      • Transparency & Democracy
    • Litigation
    • Research
    • Policy
      • Events
      • Reading Rooms
      • Blog
      • Video
      • Podcasts
      • The Knight Institute
      • Board
      • Staff
      • Visiting Scholars
      • Work With Us
      • Support Us
      • Contact
      • Press Room

Reading Room Document

Constitutional Concerns Presented by Proposed Orderly Liquidation Authority Panel

The Orderly Liquidation Authority Panel that would be authorized by section 202 of the Committee Print of the Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010 would have independent jurisdiction to determine the statutory permissibility of petitions issued by the Secretary of the Treasury to appoint the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as receiver for certain systemically important financial companies that are in default or in danger of default. If this Panel—a bankruptcy court tribunal composed of three judges from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware who are appointed by the Chief Judge of that court—were deemed to be a part of the Executive Branch, its exercise of this jurisdiction would raise both Appointments Clause and separation of powers concerns. If the Panel instead were deemed to be a part of the Judicial Branch, the Appointments Clause concerns would be mitigated, if not resolved, but the separation of powers concerns would be heightened. The Panel could be located within the Judicial Branch while addressing both the Appointments Clause and separation of powers concerns if Congress were to vest jurisdiction to review receivership petitions in an Article III court, with that court authorized to refer such petitions to the Panel and to withdraw referrals under appropriate circumstances, or if the Panel were to consist of Article III judges rather than bankruptcy judges. This structure, however, would likely prevent the Panel from adjudicating petitions where the financial company consents to the appointment of the FDIC as receiver and thus does not present a justiciable case or controversy. The OLC does not provide release dates for its opinions, so the release date listed is the date on which the opinion was authored. The original opinion is available at www.justice.gov/olc/file/2010-04-19-orderly-liquidation/download.

April 19, 2010

The OLC's Opinions

Opinions published by the OLC, including those released in response to our FOIA lawsuit

Issues

Free Speech & Social Media

Free Speech & Social Media

Featured

Knight Institute Says Visa Revocations Over Charlie Kirk Criticism Are Unconstitutional

     

Privacy & Surveillance

Privacy & Surveillance

Featured

Appeals Court Revives Journalists’ Case Against Spyware Manufacturer NSO Group

Spyware manufacturers should be held accountable in U.S. courts for actions violating U.S. law, Knight Institute says

Transparency & Democracy

Transparency & Democracy

Featured

Knight Institute Seeks Immediate Release of Trump Administration Agreements with Major Law Firms

 Says records are key to public’s understanding of administration’s vindictive campaign against political opponents

Events

The Science of Chilling Effects

Online

The Science of Chilling Effects

Learn More

Sign up for news about First Amendment events, research, and litigation

  • Issues

    • Free Speech & Social Media
    • Privacy & Surveillance
    • Transparency & Democracy
  • Litigation
  • Research
  • Policy
  • Public Education

    • Events
    • Reading Rooms
    • Blog
    • Video
    • Podcasts
  • About
  • Press Room
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy

© 2021 Knight First Amendment Institute. Design by Point Five. Development by Tierra Innovation. Icons by Leandro Castelao.

2020 Webby Award Winner for Law Website