If any of you read the governments actual motion instead of the bad faith article, you'd see first of all that this "argument" of the government is an aside in a footnote, and not that relevant to their case. Which is that this lawn care company stole wages from its workers and lied on visa applications. The footnote is basically an aside about how philosophically sometimes you can't think of money as property, because it makes some other procedures like taxes difficult. It's not a load-bearing argument at all.

Reason magazine are libertarian cranks who want to get rid of the administrative state, which is what this case is actually about anyways. Basically this is an appeal to a determination by a Department of Labor Administrative Law Judge where the lawn care company is saying its unconstitutional to have administrative courts. The government is saying no its not (its not) and also you should have brought this up sometime in the last 4 years this case was being heard by the DoL, and also you would have lost in an article 3 court anyways, because you cheated your employees and lied on visa applications.

Edit: ALSO, this is not a case from the Department of Justice, as the article (written by an attorney!) states, but it's the Department of Labor. I know its a nitpick but come on!