Introduction to [the extraordinary power of] the “Right of Association”

Adask's Law ^ | January 12, 2009 | Alfred Adask

[Beloved Levinite]

Introduction to the “Right of Association”

This is BIG.

According to at least one Supreme Court case, the “right of association” can even trump National Security interests. In other words, if the U.S. Supreme Court is called upon to balance the “right of association” against governmental interests in National Security, the private “right of association” can win. The “right of association” can be more important than National Security. I find that to be astonishing.

In fact, there are elements of the research presented in the balance of this article that I find sometimes breathtaking and sometimes weird. There appears to be power in the “right of association” unlike anything I’ve previously seen. And this “right of association,” incidentally, is a “judicial construct” that’s been “found” (created) by the Supreme Court even though it does not expressly exist within the text of the Constitution.

In order to understand the extraordinary power of the “right of association,” I believe you should start with Article 1 Section 10 Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States which declares in part, “No State shall . . . make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts.”

Note that the “States” to which this prohibition applies are the original States of the Union. I read Article 1.10.1 to mean that the States of the Union cannot lawfully collect taxes, impose fines or pay their bills in any currency other than gold or silver dollars or at least paper dollars that are redeemable in gold or silver coin.

Note that the Article 1.10.1 prohibition against any currency that’s not gold or silver applies only to the States of the Union. The federal government is not included in that prohibition and has always been free to use whatever it wanted as as a currency.

In A.D. 1933, the federal government removed gold coins from domestic circulation. Circa A.D. 1964, the feds stopped coining silver coins. Circa A.D. 1968, the feds stopped redeeming silver certificates (paper money) with silver dollars. Thus, by the end of A.D. 1968, there were no gold or silver coins in domestic circulation, nor were there any paper dollars that might still be redeemed in gold or silver.

I believe that the removal of gold and silver dollars from our national economy caused the States of the Union (which could only function with gold or silver dollars) to become insolvent and inoperable. I believe that in order to fill the resulting “void” (see the Senator Harkin’s Letter on this blog), an alternative set of fictional or territorial “states” were established (perhaps at 28 USC 81-131) that were not States of the Union and were therefore not subject to Article 1.10.1 of the Constitution of the United States. I believe these alternative “states” (like “STATE OF TEXAS” or “TX”) were intended for the primary purpose of allowing us to transact our business affairs with legal tender issued by the Federal Reserve rather than gold or silver coins minted by the U.S. Mint and thereby evade the prohibition at Article 1.10.1.

Each State of the Union is typically referred to as “The State”. Each of the territorial and/or fictional “states” (that became predominant since the gold and silver were removed) are typically referred (in the gov-co’s own law) as “this state”.

Full Article

[Beloved Levinite]

This cannot be absorbed in one sitting, obviously. It requires much time & study. But I feel it will be worth the time & effort, since the ramifications thereof are potentially HUGE. We need to take our country back...and understanding the "right of association" just might be "one key" to understanding what we need to do to make it happen.

[wintertime]

Ping....Maybe someone will explain the relationship between silver and gold coins and our right to association.

[Beloved Levinite]

Did you read the whole article?

[La Lydia]

Why didn’t you include an enlightening quote in the excerpt? What you posted seems to have nothing to do with the headline.

[PugetSoundSoldier]

Not to mention that the right of freedom of association as found by the USSC was based on the First Amendment! Article 1, section 10 has nothing to do with freedom of association.

[Beloved Levinite]

If you don’t want to take the time to study the whole article, I can’t help you. There are no SHORTCUTS in finding TRUTH. If you don’t have the time, you don’t deserve it.

[La Lydia]

If you want people to read your posts, you shouldn’t be so lazy about excerpting them.