SCOTUS blog reporting that according to a response filed by the Solicitor General Elena Kagan on behalf of the United States of America, no court, not even the Supreme Court, has an authority to rule on the applicability of the TARP funds, previously designated exclusively for financial company bail outs, for the Chrysler case.

The Obama Administration argued Monday that no court, including the Supreme Court, has the authority to hear a challenge by Indiana benefit plans to the role the U.S. Treasury played in the Chrysler rescue, including the use of “bailout” (TARP) funds. The Indiana debt holders, U.S. Solicitor General Elena Kagan wrote, simply have no right to raise that issue, thus putting it out of the reach of the courts.

Although arguing that the courts may not rule on the validity of Treasury’s decision to shore up a new Chrysler company with funds from the Troubled Assets Relief Program, the Solicitor General did argue that those funds may go to a troubled auto company, and not just to banks or other regular financial institutions.

Convenient - so if not the highest judicial institution in the US can decide on what the proper venue for TARP utilization is, does that mean that Geithner and Obama are now completely above the law in terms of how they burn taxpayer cash. Of course, the SCOTUS decision is a moot point - nobody dares to stand in front of the Obama juggernaut at this point. However, this chain of events will inevitably set off a precedent of unintended consequences for not just domestic, but also foreign lenders, when it comes to investing into any US companies, especially ones deemed to be added next on the Too Big To Fail bandwagon.

In this sense, the US will be forced to provide unlimited DIP funding as industry after industry discovers it is insolvent and the whole debate over whether the current economic crunch is liquidity driven, is concluded in favor of the rational minds, and lenders discover they have no recourse, not even with the Supreme Court Of The U.S.