[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Dead Constitution See other Dead Constitution Articles Title: Court Rules Federal Reserve is Privately Owned Court Rules Federal Reserve is Privately Owned Case Reveals Fed's Status as a Private Institution Below are excerpts from a court case proving the Federal Reserve system's status. As you will see, the court ruled that the Federal Reserve Banks are "independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations", and there is not sufficient "federal government control over 'detailed physical performance' and 'day to day operation'" of the Federal Reserve Bank for it to be considered a federal agency: Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (1982) John L. Lewis, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. United States of America, Defendant/Appellee. No. 80-5905 Plaintiff, who was injured by vehicle owned and operated by a federal reserve bank, brought action alleging jurisdiction under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The United States District Court for the Central District of California, David W. Williams, J., dismissed holding that federal reserve bank was not a federal agency within meaning of Act and that the court therefore lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. Appeal was taken. The Court of Appeals, Poole, Circuit Judge, held that federal reserve banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of the Act, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations. Affirmed. 1. United States There are no sharp criteria for determining whether an entity is a federal agency within meaning of the Federal Tort Claims Act, but critical factor is existence of federal government control over "detailed physical performance" and "day to day operation" of an entity. . . . 2. United States Federal reserve banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of a Federal Tort Claims Act, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations in light of fact that direct supervision and control of each bank is exercised by board of directors, federal reserve banks, though heavily regulated, are locally controlled by their member banks, banks are listed neither as "wholly owned" government corporations nor as "mixed ownership" corporations; federal reserve banks receive no appropriated funds from Congress and the banks are empowered to sue and be sued in their own names. . . . 3. United States Under the Federal Tort Claims Act, federal liability is narrowly based on traditional agency principles and does not necessarily lie when a tortfeasor simply works for an entity, like the Reserve Bank, which performs important activities for the government. . . . 4. Taxation The Reserve Banks are deemed to be federal instrumentalities for purposes of immunity from state taxation. 5. States Taxation Tests for determining whether an entity is federal instrumentality for purposes of protection from state or local action or taxation, is very broad: whether entity performs important governmental function. -------------- Lafayette L. Blair, Compton, Cal., for plaintiff/appellant. James R. Sullivan, Asst. U.S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., argued, for defendant/appellee; Andrea Sheridan Ordin, U.S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., on brief. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Before Poole and Boochever, Circuit Judges, and Soloman, District Judge. (The Honorable Gus J. Solomon, Senior District Judge for the District of Oregon, sitting by designation) Poole, Circuit Judge: On July 27, 1979, appellant John Lewis was injured by a vehicle owned and operated by the Los Angeles branch of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. Lewis brought this action in district court alleging jurisdiction under the Federal Tort Clains Act (the Act), 28 U.S.C. Sect. 1346(b). The United States moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The district court dismissed, holding that the Federal Reserve Bank is not a federal agency within the meaning of the Act and that the court therefore lacked subject matter jurisdiction. We affirm. In enacting the Federal Tort Claims Act, Congress provided a limited waiver of the sovereign immunity of the United States for certain torts of federal employees. . . . Specifically, the Act creates liability for injuries "caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission" of an employee of any federal agency acting within the scope of his office or employment. . . . "Federal agency" is defined as: the executive departments, the military departments, independent establishments of the United States, and corporations acting primarily as instrumentalities of the United States, but does not include any contractors with the United States. 28 U.S.C. Sect. 2671. The liability of the United States for the negligence of a Federal Reserve Bank employee depends, therefore, on whether the Bank is a federal agency under Sect. 2671. [1,2] There are no sharp criteria for determining whether an entity is a federal agency within the meaning of the Act, but the critical factor is the existence of federal government control over the "detailed physical performance" and "day to day operation" of that entity. . . . Other factors courts have considered include whether the entity is an independent corporation . . ., whether the government is involved in the entity's finances. . . ., and whether the mission of the entity furthers the policy of the United States, . . . Examining the organization and function of the Federal Reserve Banks, and applying the relevant factors, we conclude that the Reserve Banks are not federal instrumentalities for purpose of the FTCA, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations. part 2 of post above Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. The stockholding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank's nine member board of directors. The remaining three directors are appointed by the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board regulates the Reserve Banks, but direct supervision and control of each Bank is exercised by its board of directors. 12 U.S.C. Sect. 301. The directors enact by-laws regulating the manner of conducting general Bank business, 12 U.S.C. Sect. 341, and appoint officers to implement and supervise daily Bank activities. These activites include collecting and clearing checks, making advances to private and commercial entities, holding reserves for member banks, discounting the notes of member banks, and buying and selling securities on the open market. See 12 U.S.C. Sub-Sect. 341-361. Each Bank is statutorily empowered to conduct these activites without day to day direction from the federal government. Thus, for example, the interest rates on advances to member banks, individuals, partnerships, and corporations are set by each Reserve Bank and their decisions regarding the purchase and sale of securities are likewise independently made. It is evident from the legislative history of the Federal Reserve Act that Congress did not intend to give the federal government direction over the daily operation of the Reserve Banks: It is proposed that the Government shall retain sufficient power over the reserve banks to enable it to exercise a direct authority when necessary to do so, but that it shall in no way attempt to carry on through its own mechanism the routine operations and banking which require detailed knowledge of local and individual credit and which determine the funds of the community in any given instance. In other words, the reserve-bank plan retains to the Government power over the exercise of the broader banking functions, while it leaves to individuals and privately owned institutions the actual direction of routine. H.R. Report No. 69 Cong. 1st Sess. 18-19 (1913). The fact that the Federal Reserve Board regulates the Reserve Banks does not make them federal agencies under the Act. In United States v. Orleans, 425 U.S. 807, 96 S.Ct. 1971, 48 L.Ed.2d 390 (1976), the Supreme Court held that a community action agency was not a federal agency or instrumentality for purposes of the Act, even though the agency was organized under federal regulations and heavily funded by the federal government. Because the agency's day to day operation was not supervised by the federal government, but by local officials, the Court refused to extend federal tort liability for the negligence of the agency's employees. Similarly, the Federal Reserve Banks, though heavily regulated, are locally controlled by their member banks. Unlike typical federal agencies, each bank is empowered to hire and fire employees at will. Bank employees do not participate in the Civil Service Retirement System. They are covered by worker's compensation insurance, purchased by the Bank, rather than the Federal Employees Compensation Act. Employees travelling on Bank business are not subject to federal travel regulations and do not receive government employee discounts on lodging and services. The Banks are listed neither as "wholly owned" government corporations under 31 U.S.C. Sect. 846 nor as "mixed ownership" corporations under 31 U.S.C. Sect. 856, a factor considered is Pearl v. United States, 230 F.2d 243 (10th Cir. 1956), which held that the Civil Air Patrol is not a federal agency under the Act. Closely resembling the status of the Federal Reserve Bank, the Civil Air Patrol is a non-profit, federally chartered corporation organized to serve the public welfare. But because Congress' control over the Civil Air Patrol is limited and the corporation is not designated as a wholly owned or mixed ownership government corporation under 31 U.S.C. Sub-Sect. 846 and 856, the court concluded that the corporation is a non-governmental, independent entity, not covered under the Act. Additionally, Reserve Banks, as privately owned entities, receive no appropriated funds from Congress. . . . Finally, the Banks are empowered to sue and be sued in their own name. 12 U.S.C. Sect. 341. They carry their own liability insurance and typically process and handle their own claims. In the past, the Banks have defended against tort claims directly, through private counsel, not government attorneys . . ., and they have never been required to settle tort claims under the administrative procedure of 28 U.S.C. Sect. 2672. The waiver of sovereign immunity contained in the Act would therefore appear to be inapposite to the Banks who have not historically claimed or received general immunity from judicial process. [3] The Reserve Banks have properly been held to be federal instrumentalities for some purposes. In United States v. Hollingshead, 672 F.2d 751 (9th Cir. 1982), this court held that a Federal Reserve Bank employee who was responsible for recommending expenditure of federal funds was a "public official" under the Federal Bribery Statute. That statute broadly defines public official to include any person acting "for or on behalf of the Government." . . . The test for determining status as a public official turns on whether there is "substantial federal involvement" in the defendant's activities. United States v. Hollingshead, 672 F.2d at 754. In contrast, under the FTCA, federal liability is narrowly based on traditional agency principles and does not necessarily lie when the tortfeasor simply works for an entity, like the Reserve Banks, which perform important activities for the government. [4, 5] The Reserve Banks are deemed to be federal instrumentalities for purposes of immunity from state taxation. . . . The test for determining whether an entity is a federal instrumentality for purposes of protection from state or local action or taxation, however, is very broad: whether the entity performs an important governmental function. . . . The Reserve Banks, which further the nation's fiscal policy, clearly perform an important governmental function. Performance of an important governmental function, however, is but a single factor and not determinative in tort claims actions. . . . State taxation has traditionally been viewed as a greater obstacle to an entity's ability to perform federal functions than exposure to judicial process; therefore tax immunity is liberally applied. . . . Federal tort liability, however, is based on traditional agency principles and thus depends upon the principal's ability to control the actions of his agent, and not simply upon whether the entity performs an important governmental function. . . . Brinks Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 466 F.Supp. 116 (D.D.C.1979), held that a Federal Reserve Bank is a federal instrumentality for purposes of the Service Contract Act, 41 U.S.C. Sect. 351. Citing Federal Reserve Bank of Boston and Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, the court applied the "important governmental function" test and concluded that the term "Federal Government" in the Service Contract Act must be "liberally construed to effectuate the Act's humanitarian purpose of providing minimum wage and fringe benefit protection to individuals performing contracts with the federal government." Id. 288 Mich. at 120, 284 N.W.2d 667. Such a liberal construction of the term "federal agency" for purposes of the Act is unwarranted. Unlike in Brinks, plaintiffs are not without a forum in which to seek a remedy, for they may bring an appropriate state tort claim directly against the Bank; and if successful, their prospects of recovery are bright since the institutions are both highly solvent and amply insured. For these reasons we hold that the Reserve Banks are not federal agencies for purposes of the Federal Tort Claims Act and we affirm the judgement of the district court. AFFIRMED. comments from suijuris forum: hence.... .....Foreign Corporation(s)? =============== Isn't the court then also ruling that the UNITED STATES Economy is controlled by an "independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporation" ?? That's a sticky question... but it's something that should be considered. ============== what I find amazing is that in the Original Constitution, there was no contemplation of Economic control by the Congress because to do so would require a humongus and full-frontal invasion of personal privacy. thus just one more proof in evidence that this country is NOT operating IN constitutional form but is all Extra-constitution! ============== So... "what I find amazing is that in the Original Constitution, there was no contemplation of Economic control by the Congress because to do so would require a humongus and full-frontal invasion of personal privacy. thus just one more proof in evidence that this country is NOT operating IN constitutional form but is all Extra-constitution!" What are we doing , or can we, DO ABOUT IT? Yes, this is why we are all here. we all have "that splinter in our mind" that says we know something is wrong. How many people have you directed to this board today. Find them. They are out there. You don't have to be a corporate head hunter, nor reveal everything you think you know. Just entice them into checking it out. This is one tool to use against the overwhelming control over the chattel or sheeple that we all know. They all love a mystery. Look at why soap operas work, why horror flicks work, why any form of violent entertainment works. USE THAT. I simply warn them that this is the "RED PILL". That frees me from any guilt or blame. The Human brain never REALLY forgets ANYTHING it is exposed to. We know this. Use every tool the GOD LORD ABOVE gave us. To spread the truth is only a crime to the tyrants, but to spread the truth amongst a free people is a blessing. what can we do? As it is written, "when the righteous rule, the people rejoice" So, elect them who name the name that highest. The more the merrier! ================= see the rest..... Poster Comment: Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. The stockholding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank's nine member board of directors. The remaining three directors are appointed by the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board regulates the Reserve Banks, but direct supervision and control of each Bank is exercised by its board of directors. December 23, 1913, America was handed over, lock, stock, and barrel, to the Federal Reserve, which rules over us via their other corporation known as the United States government. Since we don't get to vote for the members of the Federal Reserve, which decide who the "candidates" for public office will be, this is government of the Banksters, by the Banksters, for the Banksters. Hence, all tax "laws" proceeding from the above corporations amount to taxation without representation, imo. Am I wrong? We ostensibly fought a revolution over this once before. plaintiffs are not without a forum in which to seek a remedy, for they may bring an appropriate state tort claim directly against the Bank; and if successful, their prospects of recovery are bright since the institutions are both highly solvent and amply insured....... by the full faith and CREDIT.....of the US slaves [er, taxpayers]. Okay, now I'll have to go and learn what an "appropriate state tort claim" is. God knows they need to be sued. Micah 4:13.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 4.
#1. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#0)
"How Smart Are We? Written by Administrator ["Jim"? of apparently defunct website] Dear Reader, Some facts about our banking system: "The regional Federal Reserve banks are not government agencies. ...but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations." "The Federal Reserve bank buys government bonds without one penny." "The modern Banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banks can in fact inflate, mint and unmint the modern ledger-entry currency." "Commercial banks create checkbook money whenever they grant a loan, simply by adding new deposit dollars in accounts on their books in exchange for a borrower's IOU."++ "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it." And guess what? We now have it. Right now, even with being able to create their product out of thin air, the banks are still losing billions. To cover they're [sic] incompetent asses, the Fed is lending them money – at an interest rate of 2%. Here's how this con game works. The banks trade the Fed useless debt, that which shouldn't have been made in the first place and was created out of thin air, for U.S. Government bonds. Bonds you have to pay for. Now, with these bonds on their books the banks can now lend more money to you. This is usually done via credit cards. Bottom line. The Fed borrows your money from the government for nothing. The Fed then turns around and lends it to the banks for 2%. These banks then turn around and lend your money back to you at a rate of 10% - 30%. I'll ask again. Just how smart are we?"
Dear Reader The "Federal Reserve Notes" are legally described as "OBLIGATIONS" of the United States or in other words DEBTS of the United States. These debts are only backed by the willingness of the people to enslave themselves through taxation to repay them. [These OBLIGATIONS are at the same time referenced as "securities" which is a commercial term and dollars are in effect under law commercial paper, to be regulated under commercial law. Commercial law is basically contract law under law merchant standards and have nothing whatsoever to do with CONstitutional law. The "creditor" (Federal Reserve) is master while the debtor (United States citizenry) is enslaved. The law is written by the master for the slave to obey. Commercial Law trumps CONstitutional Law as it is completely voluntary for people to enter upon the commercial side which is entirely created, implicitly or explicitly, through agreements/contracts/or fiduciary obligations that preclude CONstitutional restraints or individual rights. Commercial Law is not Common Law. Common Law is Constitutional wherein crime requires a victim. Commercial Law is based upon crimes related to contract breaches that include statutory violations without a victim. Any system or situation that in any way accepts FRNs (commercial paper) in "payment" (which is actually discharge of debt without extinguishing that debt) is based upon legal fictions that can only exist outside of the fundamental law which requires debt to be extinguished through real money (gold/silver) and is not organic/common/CONstitutional Law. Common Law and Commercial Law create two different jurisdictions or "dimensions" that cannot recognize each other like two separate universes.
I spent about 3 hours replying to this yesterday, and then my computer crashed and I lost it all. I know what you are saying is true. It took me a long time to understand it, and I am still learning, muddling along at a slow pace. The "creditor" (Federal Reserve) is master while the debtor (United States citizenry) is enslaved. The "Federal Reserve Notes" are legally described as "OBLIGATIONS" of the United States or in other words DEBTS of the United States. These debts are only backed by the willingness of the people to enslave themselves through taxation to repay them. You are correct, of course. What I was providing evidence of yesterday, is that we have reached the stage where that choice could cost one his life. The lower case "c" in citizenry is duly noted. Under the Noahide Laws, and the Military Commissions Act, one is liable to be treated as a terrorist, swept off the street, and into some tribunal for choosing to NOT be a "citizen of the United States", which as you know, is an antiChrist private corporation. Check out the definition of "alien" in the Military Commissions Act, as in "alien unlawful enemy combatant". "Aliens" are those who are not "US citizens". That would include those who have claimed to be State [or American] Citizens rather than "US citizens", I would assume. When they talk about the surveillance act spying on Americans "outside the United States", what they are really talking about most likely, is those who refuse to be "US citizens". Real Americans are the real enemy here, and always have been. [Cornwallis to George Washington: A holy war will now begin against America....and it started even before that.... at the founding with the cross at Cape Henry.] The 2-tiered court system under the Military Commissions Act is a perfect set-up for secretly implementing the Noahide Laws. I recall a hundred thousand guillotines were being delivered to army bases or concentration camps YEARS ago. Why? I have noticed that many, many of the "Remedy" sites have bitten the dust. What has happened to the folks who ran these sites? What has happened to our own BTPHoldings? He seemed to disappear off the face of the earth. Where is richard9151? I have been noticing his absence for a while now. Hopefully, he just went over to robin's site, or is just busy. The Mark of the Beast, them "raising up the rod after us after the manner of Egypt", coming to cast us out of the land God has given us to inherit, Ezekiel 38-39, etc. etc., are all being fulfilled here. However, God said He would raise up the staff [us??] against THEM, so I plan to continue to muddle along and post some articles I think are relevant to help those like me who are a little slow, to more clearly understand the situation, and the possible remedy. Your input is ALWAYS welcome.
There are no replies to Comment # 4. End Trace Mode for Comment # 4.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||