ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Bankruptcy Blogs -> Credit Slips

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Bankruptcy

: Credit Slips

BAPCPA Gag Rule Found Constitutional by Fifth Circuit

By Tara Twomey

ADVERTISEMENTS
Rarely do we get two important consumer bankruptcy decisions from the circuit courts in the same week, but it appears this is no ordinary week.  As noted previously, the Seventh Circuit this week decided an important means test issue, and yesterday, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in emIn re Hersh/em, No. 07-10226 (5th Cir. Dec. 18, 2008) rendered a decision in a case challenging the constitutionality of sections 526(a)(4) and 527(b).  These two sections are part of the debt relief agency provisions added by BAPCPA./p After finding that bankruptcy attorneys qualify as ?debt relief agencies? under 11 U.S.C. § 101(12A), the court affirmed the district court?s holding that § 527(b), which compels that certain information regarding bankruptcy proceedings be conveyed by the ?debt relief agency? to ?assisted persons,? does not violate the First Amendment. The court reversed the district court?s finding that § 526(a)(4), which prohibits an attorney from advising his or her client to incur debt in contemplation of filing for bankruptcy, is facially unconstitutional./p In finding that § 526(a)(4) does not offend the First Amendment, the court applied the doctrine of constitutional avoidance to narrowly interpret the provision such that it would fall within constitutional parameters. Thus, the court construed the phrase ?in contemplation of? to suggest that the prohibition is coupled with an implicit requirement that the speech only be prohibited when it constitutes an intent to abuse the bankruptcy system. Here, the court deviated from the Eighth Circuit majority opinion in emMilavetz,Gallop amp; Milavetz, P.A., v. United States/em, 541 F.3d 785 (8supth/sup Cir. 2008), which held that the provision was facially unconstitutional./p

Full post as published by Credit Slips on December 19, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0129 secs (new cache)