Sentiments Affect Detroit Bankruptcy

The artwork of the Detroit Institute of the Arts has caused a stir in the city’s bankruptcy courts. Evaluations and appraisals of the value of the artwork have been engaged in, as a means of attempting to offset the city’s debts. A variety of evaluations have come back on the work provided by the institute, ranging from eight hundred million dollars to eight billion dollars. Many citizens of the city are hoping that the bankruptcy court favors the lower dollar amount, as to catch a bigger break on the city’s filing for bankruptcy.

This has caused a controversy in the city, according to an article recently completed by U.S. News. The article declares that the efforts of the city and its workers are a manipulative attempt to influence the court and sway the judgment of the judge seeing over the proceedings. To the author, the move is unfair and likely illegal, as it focuses on sentiment over the cool clarity of the lawq.

For the author, the law is created and executed by humans, but it doesn’t behave like a human. It has no mind or heart; it listens to the cold facts, and doesn’t change based on passionate arguments or emotional appeal. The law makes society more civil, due to its cool impartiality.

But this does not seem to be the case in Detroit, where the media outlets are encouraging the maneuvers of the city and the workers to sway the judgment on the value of the paintings. Rulings should not be made based on how one individual or an entire city has suffered. While these facets do make a trial more interesting and prompt sentiment in those who listen, they are erroneous in bankruptcy cases, as the law must be impervious to sentiment.

As a result of the already sentiment driven judgments from Detroit’s bankruptcy courts, public employees and municipal creditors have both been affected. A significant amount of money has been lost in the sentiment of Detroit’s bankruptcy proceedings—money that is likely never to be restored to the city and its workers. These funds exist to help those who really need the funds, based in the rulings of the law, not in the rulings of the heart.