Tuesday, February 6, 2018

New court ruling on pensions could provide Federal government the precedent to be allowed to cut Social Security benefits

When it comes to changes in the law, there is an old axiom that says what happens in New York or California often becomes adopted nationwide.  And we may be soon seeing if a caveat to this is true as well following a new ruling by a Federal Appellate court which agreed that states and municipalities have the right to cut promised benefits for pension and retirement plans they administer.

The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit gave us an interesting glimpse of the future last week when it ruled on an obscure case involving government pension obligations. 
Ever since the mid-1990s, police officers and fire fighters in the town of Cranston, Rhode Island had been promised state pension benefits upon retirement. 
But, facing critical budget shortfalls over the last several years that the Rhode Island government called “fiscal peril,” the state legislature voted to unilaterally reduce public employees’ pension benefits. 
Even more, these cuts were retroactive, i.e. they didn’t just apply to new employees.
Last week the First Circuit Court issued a final ruling and sided with the state of Rhode Island: the government has no obligation to honor its promises. 
But here at Sovereign Man our team pays very close attention to these obscure court cases because they often set very dangerous precedents. 
This one certainly does. Because Social Security is in even WORSE condition that the State of Rhode Island’s perilous pension system. 
The First Circuit just showed us what the solution is: cutting benefits.
And now the government has legal precedent to do so. – Sovereign Man
And oh by the way, the Supreme Court has already provided a precedent back in the 1950's when they ruled that Social Security can be changed and modified as the government sees fit.
Flemming v. Nestor, 363 U.S. 603 (1960), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld the constitutionality of Section 1104 of the 1935 Social Security Act. In this Section, Congress reserved to itself the power to amend and revise the schedule of benefits.


Is this even newsworthy? How about some hard hitting topics like kids eating Tide pods, or who gets to bake cakes for whomever, or who "stunned" with their makeover?

Post a Comment