NO, BUT IT’S JUST A DUMB DEMOCRATIC TALKING POINT: Neither the Constitution Nor Common Sense Supports the Argument the Debt Ceiling Is Unconstitutional: Professor Prakash dispatches the arguments for unilateral Presidential authority to disregard the debt ceiling.

If Congress fails to raise the debt ceiling, the only reason there would be a default is if the executive fails to pay the interest on the debt as it comes due. But if the executive branch believes there is a constitutional requirement to pay the interest, why would it even consider refusing to do so? To my knowledge there is no law that prevents the executive from prioritizing interest payments above all other spending.

In fact, there is an argument that having by statute pledged the “faith of the United States Government,” Congress implicitly prioritized the payment of the interest and principal. If the debt ceiling isn’t raised, the Treasury should pay the interest as it is due and spend less than Congress appropriated. That would be the best solution in the wake of a mismatch between total inflows (taxes plus new borrowing) and Congress’s desired spending.

As I’ve said before, the notion that we’d continue to pay bondholders while slashing other spending is fine with me. Much (most?) of what we spend federal money on domestically is not only unnecessary, but positively harmful.