Justice Stephen G. Breyer is now retired from the U.S. Supreme Court, serving from August 3, 1994, to June 30, 2022.
One of his legacies—and an exceedingly important one—is this: he has worked, successfully, to erase “public rights” from the lexicon of controlling bankruptcy law.
What follows is a summary of how “public rights” came to be part of that lexicon, and how Justice Breyer works to get it erased.
“PUBLIC RIGHTS” BEGINNING—Northern Pipeline
The case before the U.S. Supreme Court is MOAC Mall Holdings LLC v. Transform Holdco LLC, Case No. 21-1270.
The bankruptcy question upon which the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari is this:
The Bankruptcy Protector
In 2019, Congress enacted the Small Business Reorganization Act. This legislation created a new type of Chapter 11 reorganization under which certain businesses with total debts less than a certain threshold (currently $7.5 million) could reorganize. These provisions, known as Subchapter V eliminated certain requirements for confirmation of a reorganization plan and include other changes to make small business reorganization quicker and less expensive.
In a decision rendered on June 6, 2022, Justice Sotomayor authored the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in the case Siegel v. Fitzgerald, holding that a statutory increase in United States Trustee’s fees violated the “uniformity” requirement of the Bankruptcy Clause set forth in Article I, § 7, cl. 4 of the United States Constitution, which empowers Congress to establish “uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States.”1
Congress and the President finally extend the $7.5 million debt limit for Subchapter V eligibility:
- by “unanimous consent” in the Senate;
- by a vote of 392 – 21 in the House; and
A legislative history of the new law is at this link.
The new law is bi-partisan and uncontroversial. But there are some bells and whistles, as discussed below.
“SUNSET” – Again!
It seems like a small thing: Chapter 11 debtors in two states paying lower quarterly fees than Chapter 11 debtors in the other 48 states.
What’s the big deal?
Alabama and North Carolina throw a political hissy fit, three or four decades ago. They want their own Bankruptcy Administrator system (not the U.S. Trustee system established everywhere else). And they are rewarded. The reward includes lower quarterly fees.
Where’s the harm in lower quarterly fees? What follows is an attempt to:
“The Congress shall have Power To . . . establish . . . uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States.”
–U.S. Constitution’s Bankruptcy Clause (Art. 1, Sec. 8, cl. 4).
An Old Losing Streak—Article III
On June 6, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Siegel v. Fitzgerald, in which the Court held that the Bankruptcy Judgeship Act of 2017, Pub. L. 115-72, Div. B, 131 Stat. 1229 (the “2017 Act”) was unconstitutional.
As we’ve previously reported, on February 19, 2020, Congress enacted the Small Business Reorganization Act (“SBRA”) to, among other things, streamline the chapter 11 bankruptcy process for small businesses. Under the SBRA, a “small business” was one with less than $2,725,625.00 in debt. Few businesses, however, were eligible to take advantage of these new provisions because their debts exceeded the cap.