Re: Yeah Really!!!

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Supreme Law Firm Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by I don't like it any more than you do, but... on July 27, 1998 at 18:03:45:

In Reply to: Re: Yeah Really!!! posted by T. Mann on July 27, 1998 at 15:55:10:

Seems pretty clear to me.

"It is equally well settled that Congress has the power to incorporate national banks, with the capacity, for their own profit as well as for the use of the government in its money transactions, of issuing bills which, under ordinary circumstances, pass from hand to hand as money at their nominal value, and which, when so current, the law has always recognized as a good tender in payment of money debts, unless specifically objected to at the time of the tender."
U. S. Bank v. Bank of Georgia, 10 Wheat. 333, 347;

"It appears to us to follow, as a logical and necessary consequence, that congress has the power to issue the obligations of the United States in such form, and to impress upon them such qualities as currency for the purchase of merchandise and the payment of debts, as accord with the usage of sovereign governments."
Juilliard v. Greenman 110 US 421

: 3) The first round of legal tender cases were struck down by the Supreme(s) until it was pointed out that the military necessity of enforcing these notes as legal tender. Military necessity, in the minds of the Supreme(s) over rules the Constitution. The only reason FRNs are enforceable today is due to the ongoing state of emergency declared and reaffirmed periodically.

I'd appreciate a cite on that one. I'd like to read it if you don't mind.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup




Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Supreme Law Firm Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]