Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: The Legal Tender (Paper Money) Cases Are Unconstitutional

  1. #1

    The Legal Tender (Paper Money) Cases Are Unconstitutional




  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    The Coinage Act of 1792 was also unconstitutional, since it made gold and silver coin lawful tender all across the United States. The federal government doesn't have the power to make any currency legal tender for the payment of private debts.

    http://fauxcapitalist.com/2011/10/18...igned-one-too/

    "Loyola professor and senior Mises Institute fellow, Thomas DiLorenzo, likes to attack President Abraham Lincoln for his policies of questionable constitutional authority.

    What DiLorenzo won’t do, however, is attack with the same zeal, the same alleged violation of the Constitution by the first, and generally highly regarded President of the United States, George Washington."

  4. #3
    My impression is that most things the Federal Government does are unconstitutional but that doesn't seem to stop the legislature from passing them and the executive from enforcing them and the courts from upholding them.
    Ron Paul: He irritates more idiots in fewer words than any American politician ever.

    NO MORE LIARS! Ron Paul 2012

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by FauxCapitalist View Post
    The Coinage Act of 1792 was also unconstitutional, since it made gold and silver coin lawful tender all across the United States. The federal government doesn't have the power to make any currency legal tender for the payment of private debts.

    http://fauxcapitalist.com/2011/10/18...igned-one-too/

    "Loyola professor and senior Mises Institute fellow, Thomas DiLorenzo, likes to attack President Abraham Lincoln for his policies of questionable constitutional authority.

    What DiLorenzo won’t do, however, is attack with the same zeal, the same alleged violation of the Constitution by the first, and generally highly regarded President of the United States, George Washington."
    I agree. They were charged with setting standards but not with forcing government money on the people. The Coinage Act of 1792 is an unconstitutional act.
    "Everyone who believes in freedom must work diligently for sound money, fully redeemable. Nothing else is compatible with the humanitarian goals of peace and prosperity." -- Ron Paul

    Brother Jonathan

  6. #5
    From the article:

    "Finally, Congress and the court violated the prohibition against ex post facto laws: “No . . . ex post facto Law shall be passed.”[3]"

    There was Calder v. Bull (1798), wherein the Supreme Court decided that the ex post facto provision only applies to criminal cases.

    While I don't agree with that decision, they used the great English jurist, William Blackstone, to support their decision.

    This is an example of passages from the Constitution that don't mean what you think they mean, even before corrupt Supreme Court Justices got their hands on them.

  7. #6
    Faux:

    Thanks for your reply. Calder and Blackstone notwithstanding, the term ex post facto ought be applied in its literal sense, "after the fact" or no retroactive laws, whether civil or criminal. The first requisite of due process of law is that laws must plainly preannounce conduct which is illegal; that can't happen with an ex post facto law.

  8. #7
    Supporting Member
    Phoenix, AZ
    Cleaner44's Avatar


    Blog Entries
    4
    Posts
    9,145
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by WilliamC View Post
    My impression is that most things the Federal Government does are unconstitutional but that doesn't seem to stop the legislature from passing them and the executive from enforcing them and the courts from upholding them.
    Quote of the day!

    +rep good sir
    Citizen of Arizona
    @cleaner4d4

    I am a libertarian. I am advocating everyone enjoy maximum freedom on both personal and economic issues as long as they do not bring violence unto others.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by FauxCapitalist View Post
    The Coinage Act of 1792 was also unconstitutional, since it made gold and silver coin lawful tender all across the United States. The federal government doesn't have the power to make any currency legal tender for the payment of private debts.

    http://fauxcapitalist.com/2011/10/18...igned-one-too/

    "Loyola professor and senior Mises Institute fellow, Thomas DiLorenzo, likes to attack President Abraham Lincoln for his policies of questionable constitutional authority.

    What DiLorenzo won’t do, however, is attack with the same zeal, the same alleged violation of the Constitution by the first, and generally highly regarded President of the United States, George Washington."
    I disagree. I believe that is covered under Article 1 Section Eight which lists the powers of Congress:
    To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
    http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec8.html



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Travlyr View Post
    I agree. They were charged with setting standards but not with forcing government money on the people. The Coinage Act of 1792 is an unconstitutional act.
    wait, you mean something was wrong before 1913?



Similar Threads

  1. The U.S. issuance of paper money is unconstitutional
    By Douglass Bartley in forum U.S. Constitution
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-26-2012, 08:50 AM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-30-2011, 07:47 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-25-2010, 01:42 PM
  4. Could there be a government without a legal tender?
    By liberty_lover in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-01-2010, 09:36 PM
  5. Legal tender laws
    By noxagol in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-22-2008, 07:20 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •