Debts Incurred During Rebellion

Disputing 1997 article arguing for a broad reading of the public debt clause. Arguing that the original public meaning reveals a much narrower understanding based on contemporary legal sources, the legislative history of the clause, and the historical context. Concluding that the phrase was understood at ratification to be technical language prohibiting only direct governmental debt repudiation.

Providing ways in which the U.S. sovereign debt could be restructured. Looking to original judicial interpretations of the Clause and the legislative history. 

Arguing that the first sentence of Section 4 is open to a wide range of interpretations and that the Section has become obscure. Contending that because the first sentence has a broad meaning, the government can meet its fiscal commitments and can apply this clause to many fiscal questions. Discussing early judicial interpretations, such as the congressional actions triggering the clause, historical evidence, and the political and economic context in which it was framed.

Proposing a broad reading of the Public Debt Clause. Arguing that the clause does not prohibit any governmental action that “jeopardizes” the validity of the public debt and providing a brief legislative history of Section 4.