A quick legal lesson about the whole LibDollar fiasco

[foofighter20x]

People have asked why, if there was a crime committed, that no one was arrest, only assets seized?

The answer is simple.

When the authorites arrest someone, the person has the right to contest his detention under habeas corpus. The same doesn't hold true for seized property, however.

So, by not arresting anyone, the feds have basically allowed themselves tons of time to withstand and prepare for any contests over the constitutionality of the laws.

See, if they had arrested someone, the person could contest the constitutionality of his detention, which would require the courts to quickly hold hearings.

[noztnac]

Can the guy not press charges for robbery? I'm sure that's a stupid question to a lawyer but most Americans are not lawyers and he would get a lot of sympathy from the public and that might translate into votes for Ron Paul. If I were him I'd raise hell and call a spade a spade. They stole his property.

[foofighter20x]

Well, I'm not a lawyer... And the answer to your question is no. It's not robbery.

Remember that for the government to seize property under the Fourth Amendment for a criminal investigation, the magistrate only needs sworn testimony that reasonably leads him to believe a crime has probably occurred; hence the name probable cause.

If the government can't build a case, they return the property and then its owner can seek redress.

In my opinion, though, I'd still call it gov't theft. It's a good PR move. ;)

[Bradley in DC]

Can the guy not press charges for robbery? I'm sure that's a stupid question to a lawyer but most Americans are not lawyers and he would get a lot of sympathy from the public and that might translate into votes for Ron Paul. If I were him I'd raise hell and call a spade a spade. They stole his property.

No, sovereign immunity.

[foofighter20x]

No, sovereign immunity.

Also correct.

Though, I've never agreed with that whole legal doctrine... American jurisprudence holds that the people are sovereign, and nowhere did the people authorize the government to declare itself immune from being sued... Unless you can somehow take the Necessary and Proper Clause and contort it more than a Cirque du Soleil performer...

[pcosmar]

No, sovereign immunity.

And that is something that NEEDS to be done away with.
The government and it's agents must be held accountable.

[foofighter20x]

Where I like to think Liberty Dollar will beat this rap:

My thought is that the entirety of the case will turn on whether Liberty Dollar can successfully challenge the State to prove that the laws it has violated were necessary and proper to the execution of the explicit powers of Congress. If the feds can't prove they are necessary or proper to clause 6 (which at face value they aren't) then those criminal codes are unconstitutional and no crime was ever committed.

Article I, Section 8, clauses 5 and 6:

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

Article I, Section 8, clauses 18:

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

Title 18, United States Code, Section 486 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000486----000-.html):

Whoever, except as authorized by law, makes or utters or passes, or attempts to utter or pass, any coins of gold or silver or other metal, or alloys of metals, intended for use as current money, whether in the resemblance of coins of the United States or of foreign countries, or of original design, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

Bolded where I think the government must make their case.

What do I mean by all this?

The government can only punish for the counterfeiting of U.S. securities (Treasury Notes and, by extension, FRNs) and current coin. That is, the feds can only prosecute for anything that is meant to pass as government currency which was made without the approval of Congress.

Liberty Dollars bear no resemblance to any FRNs, T-Notes, and their "rounds"--or coins--bear no likeness to any coin currently minted by the United States (the "current coin" in clause 6). Since one of the cornerstone concepts of counterfeiting is to have the product look so similar that it easily passes as authentic, I don't think the State can legitimately argue that the Liberty Dollars are counterfeits of United State coins or securities.

Therefore, the people (and States) can make their own securities so long as they do not resemble US coin or securities. Any prohibition of such private securities isn't necessary to prevent against counterfeiting U.S. coins or securities, nor is it proper to prohibit those private securities if they bear no resemblance to current U.S. coins or securities.

In my opinion, it fails the requirement of the Necessary and Proper Clause in assisting the government in the execution of punishing the counterfeiters of U.S. securities and current coin.

[constituent]

...

[noztnac]

constituent said "at this point liberty dollars = heat"

I'd stick my hand in that fire and make everyone watch. Right or wrong the general public is going to see the government as the bad guy. Liberty dollars may be toast but liberty is not. The government may win the battle here but lose the war. I don't think the government has a handle on how much they are distrusted and disliked. People are no longer willing to give the government the benefit of the doubt.