Replies

There are two systems of law in America, criminal and civil. The Seventh amendment flatly states that the right to a Jury trial exists when the value in controversy exceeded $20 — assuming all these are indeed in excess of $20, does this not mean that the IRS is violating the 7th Amendment? (And doesn't that also mean that 18USC242 and 241 apply?)

They get around this by SUING THE MONEY or PROPERTY, not you. Look in the publication of public record where they are "supposed" to publish the actions. You will see these "State of California v. $10,256" cases. I saw these on day when I was bored and started reading the legal ads. There were dozens of them! You'd also see things like "State of California v. 2005 Honda Accord" and "State of California v. XYZ 24 foot fishing boat" There'd be some description of where it was seized and a show cause for someone to appear, but they sue asset, not a person. The asset and money have no rights.

> There are two systems of law in America, criminal and civil. The Seventh amendment flatly states that the right to a Jury trial exists when the value in controversy exceeded $20 — assuming all these are indeed in excess of $20, does this not mean that the IRS is violating the 7th Amendment? (And doesn't that also mean that 18USC242 and 241 apply?)

They get around this by SUING THE MONEY or PROPERTY, not you. Look in the publication of public record where they are "supposed" to publish the actions. You will see these "State of California v. $10,256" cases. I saw these on day when I was bored and started reading the legal ads. There were dozens of them! You'd also see things like "State of California v. 2005 Honda Accord" and "State of California v. XYZ 24 foot fishing boat" There'd be some description of where it was seized and a show cause for someone to appear, but they sue asset, not a person. The asset and money have no rights.

Hm, then does it work the other way?
Citizen X v. Federal Building on Main St

Somehow I think they'd trip all over themselves saying you can't do that!, Illegitimate!, and Foul! if someone tried.
(Hell, I bet the judge would throw it out, on standing, and then declare that such created a damage to the honor and dignity of the State, thus allowing them to [counter-]sue the person too.)