‘Owned’ in this case as being property. And by DOJ, I mean a DOJ Attorney that is submitting an opposition for summary judgment. So it’s not the entirety of the DOJ, but it’s a person representing the DOJ, so it’s arguably the DOJ.
In this case;
The DOJ made these allegations as paraphrased by the reason;
Here are snippets;
continued in next page;
The notes say that money is not ‘clear’ on how it equates to private property. And that this matter of taking ‘money’ and ‘private property’ isn’t an infringement of ‘public rights’ therefore not needing a trial by jury of peers.
Therefore the assertion is that owning money isn’t a ‘public right’ (which ties into the highlighted text above the note for civil cases and jury and whatnot).
This isn’t a critique on the entirety of the Purported claims, just a critique on the latter half of the claims specifically regarding this senseless debauchery with money and property rights. Diving into the footnotes which seems to have it’s persecution be enshrined in “public rights exceptions” per Non-Article III tribunals.
Second page of notes;
The note further continues to state that “money is not necessarily ‘property'” because the Fed Govt creates it. (which is not true, seeing as the Fed Reserve creates money and that’s not a part of the Federal Government. So that statement is a lie).
The note continues to say along the lines of; it makes no sense to think of Money as property because the Government can Tax it and spend it for ‘general welfare’. It’s not yours because the Government can, and I quote ‘take‘ your money.
Libertarians calling taxation theft, are sounding more and more reasonable by the second.
And the note finally concludes something to the effect of: If money was property, then it’s owned by the United States (and never anyone else). Which sets a dangerous global precedent seeing as the US dollar is the global reserve currency. I mean, that statement is always implied Machievellianly with USD being the global reserve currency, but to say it outright is fucking bonkers. This also means that you or any citizen never owns money.
To be fair, if you can’t print or destroy money, because of ‘laws’, then it’s not really your property. I disagree with the idea of money not being a property thing, but that’s like, my opinion.
Civil forfeiture is a scam
My opinion.
Also Administrative forfeitures is a scam, without being read the right to contest. You ought to be allowed the opportunity and even be reminded of the ability to contest forfeitures like the Miranda rights. My opinion.
If they can take your property or money as a ‘punishment’ but without going through due process, then that’s a violation of constitutional rights. My opinion.
If they can freeze your assets or tell you how to use your property (including monetary capital) without a reasonable assessment of harming or endangering the public, then it’s a scam. My opinion.
If they decide to make up what ‘public safety’ is on the fly, then it’s a scam. My opinion.
In Closing
I really think we need constitutional and human rights reforms on the concept of ‘ownership’ of money and data. We ought to have Monetary Sovereignty and Data Privacy or better Data Sovereignty.
Also, we ought to have a right to a reminder (and the right to) that we can contest any forfeiture.
My opinions. Not eligible or valid for any use in case law.
*Not Valid Financial, Legal, Life, or Any Advice (or Opinions)