REPORT DEAD LINKS --- we can't keep this site up-to-date without your help
Some legal questions about Money and banking.
1) Did Congress have the right to farm out their Constitutional right (in 1913) to "coin money and regulate the value thereof" to an organization (The Federal Reserve System of Banks) that is (a) owned and run by private citizens and (b) has no checks and balances by any government agency or branch of government??
2) Can I or someone else take the federal government to court? Perhaps as (A) a private attorney general objecting to the Government borrowing money when it has the sovereign and Constitutional right to create whatever money we need (that would save me and every other taxpayer a total of $400 Billion dollars in interest on the national debt every year), or (B) as myself asking a court for a declaratory judgment on my rights to stop the government from borrowing money?
3) Do you know of any activist group that has lawyers that would be interested in looking into the above #1 and #2?
4) Do you know of any activist, public-interest lawyers who would be interested in helping us get the idea of State-chartered, narrow banks going? (That is link #1 on the home page of this website) I know the only problem we will have is from State and Federal bureaucrats who somehow think they must prevent competition among banks -- by making it very difficult for a new bank to get started. Under the written law --- I am absolutely certain there is nothing to stop the formation of small banks. But I suspect the bureaucrats will put up barriers that do not comport with written law. Wright Patman (read about him on my website) talks about this in his book "A Primer on Money" -- I can give you the page numbers. You can read them on my website and print out whatever you want to read at your leisure. Preventing competition among banks, is, I believe, simply not the American way. If they are exempt from antitrust laws, I think that could be successfully challengedin court.
5) Is the federal reserve system exempt from antitrust laws?
From wisegeek.com
American antitrust laws are state and federal laws created to prevent monopolies. Antitrust laws apply to both businesses and individuals. The philosophy behind the laws is that trusts and monopolies can stagnate markets and prevent others from engaging in healthy market competition.
All American antitrust laws date back to the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 that was passed by Congress to remove limits on competitive trade. The Sherman Antitrust Act affects all interstate business transactions. Section 1 of the Sherman Act states that the courts are to interpret which contracts unfairly restrict trade. Section 2 deems it illegal for a company or an individual "to monopolize, or attempt to monopolize."
Courts usually decide on antitrust cases on the grounds that a monopoly itself may be justified only if justifiable business practices warrant it. We can think about the example of a manufacturing company that has to produce and use its own parts in a product to ensure consumer safety standards are met. Competition is being limited by the company, but if public safety is at risk, the courts would probably rule that antitrust laws have not been violated as the motive is consumer safety and not one of purposefully limiting competition.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is legally permitted to interpret and enforce section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act's antitrust laws. Section 5 discusses "unfair methods of competition" but does not define what the "unfair methods" are in relation to trade restrictions. The FTC must enforce the standards and interpret the law in each particular antitrust case.
Another antitrust law, The Clayton Act, covers mergers and acquisitions. No merger or acquisition is permitted if the result of doing so "may be substantially to lessen competition, or to tend to create a monopoly." Again, the antitrust law is open to interpretation on a case by case basis, which sometimes necessitates the evidence of comprehensive economic market studies.