This Note argues that U.S. Trust's Contracts Clause test created ambiguities that have spawned varying and conflicting approaches in the circuits. This Note also argues that U.S. Trust's failure to advance the Framers' original intent and departure from precedent has created the doctrinal disagreement that feeds the circuit split. Part I presents the history of the Contracts Clause from the Constitutional Convention up to the decision in U.S. Trust. Part II emphasizes the negative consequences of U.S. Trust's novel approach by detailing the varying approaches the circuits have taken in applying the ambiguous dual standards set out in U.S. Trust. Part III critically analyzes U.S. Trust's new violations standard and argues the Supreme Court needs to resolve the circuit split by reformulating U.S. Trust's test. This Part then offers a new test that will clarify U.S. Trust's ambiguities and correct its flaws.