- Apr 29, 2006
law isn't legal, and should be smacked down first time it comes up in court
No, 31 USC 5103, does NOT say US currency is legal tender for any transaction.I doubt this law would withstand scrutiny in federal court as it seems to be preempted by 31 U.S.C. 5103 which establishes that US Currency is legal tender for any transaction.
Yes, businesses are free to individually contract for non-cash payment, but that's not the same as a state issuing a blanket law. In the former case, a business is recognizing cash as legal tender, but refusing to accept it because they prefer payment in another form. In the latter case, the state is attempting to say that cash is not legal tender for certain subsets of transactions which runs counter to federal law.
I think that the first person to challenge this law will likely win.
Makes no sense at all. Of all the businesses likely to inadvertently transact stolen goods, despite maintaining records, pawn shops are exempt. The entire thing is retarded, but this especially so since it defeats the whole purpose.Pawn shops have been forced to keep records of their clients for years. However under this bill they are still allowed to deal in cash.
Pawn Shops are required to document every transaction, including the address phone number and PHOTO ID of the person selling to them. Yes stolen goods a hocked at pawn shops all the time but there is a paper trail and evidence of who sold it to the pawn shop. Thats probably why they are exempted. I am sure LA thought about requiring all second hand sellers do the same, but that would probably cost the businesses even more money.Makes no sense at all. Of all the businesses likely to inadvertently transact stolen goods, despite maintaining records, pawn shops are exempt. The entire thing is retarded, but this especially so since it defeats the whole purpose.
The Louisiana House and Senate have Republican majorities. Hardy is one of 15 sponsors of the bill, 9 of which are Republicans.Yeah, except Rickey Hardy is a Democrat.
Virtually 50:50. Good old bipartisan stupidity, and working together for a common cause. Namely subjugating the population, and striving towards the totalitarian state they all desire.The Louisiana House and Senate have Republican majorities. Hardy is one of 15 sponsors of the bill, 9 of which are Republicans.
No, Zenmervolt is likely correct. No one is arguing that businesses must take cash. What he said was that the state government is restricting the opposite - that businesses shall not accept cash for second hand goods. There's a difference between when a business says cash is no good here and when the government tells a business cash is no good here.No, 31 USC 5103, does NOT say US currency is legal tender for any transaction.
Yanked from treasury.gov
Legal Tender Status
I thought that United States currency was legal tender for all debts. Some businesses or governmental agencies say that they will only accept checks, money orders or credit cards as payment, and others will only accept currency notes in denominations of $20 or smaller. Isn't this illegal?
The pertinent portion of law that applies to your question is the Coinage Act of 1965, specifically Section 31 U.S.C. 5103, entitled "Legal tender," which states: "United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues."
This statute means that all United States money as identified above are a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor. There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise. For example, a bus line may prohibit payment of fares in pennies or dollar bills. In addition, movie theaters, convenience stores and gas stations may refuse to accept large denomination currency (usually notes above $20) as a matter of policy.
Bottom line is, LA isn't technically breaking any constitutional law or federal statutory law. Is the law stupid and misguided? Yeah. Is it illegal. No.
Federal law says nothing about transactions, only about debt payments to creditors. Theres nothing on the books that says a state cannot regulate cash transactions. In fact its is quite the opposite, the feds leave it up to the state on whether or not to force businesses to accept cash for transactions. Federal law says nothing about the issue at hand. And without a federal law, there is no invoking the supremacy clause.No, Zenmervolt is likely correct. No one is arguing that businesses must take cash. What he said was that the state government is restricting the opposite - that businesses shall not accept cash for second hand goods. There's a difference between when a business says cash is no good here and when the government tells a business cash is no good here.
There's also probably a constitutional claim under the First Amendment as well.
Just because they do sales outside the state, doesn't mean they are exempted from state laws. Sales and buys conducted instate would be regulated by the state laws. In interstate commerce, the laws may still apply depending of factual circumstances.they can argue pretty easily that they do business across state lines and the states laws do not apply to interstate commerce or soemthing like that?