Saturday, May 15, 2004
curfew and peonage
as readers of my other blogs may be aware,
i'm litigating a free press/speech case.
i was thinking about kids, and how their freedom of expression is violated by curfews. (we have a new curfew statute in indiana.) I wondered if there had been any cases applying the 13th amendment to the status of women. geocities link.
oh, and dad, you were right that the supreme court has upheld the draft as not a 13th a. violation. but the case, from 1922, is not exactly persuasive.
in 1922 the court didn't recognize the constitution as standing for much of anything. (my father is dead. i got from him my stubbornness and that little voice that tells me i'm right, even if the whole world disagrees. it has taken me some 30 years to look up the case, and i now agree he was right, i was wrong, but my comeback is that the court was wrong, and the case is stale. anyway...)
so i'm not finding much yet under the thirteenth amendment, but i did find a statute that outlaws peonage (debt slavery) and involuntary servitude, and i think i could build a case against curfews under the statute. not necessarily a winning case, but not a frivolous one.
SAMUEL M. CLYATT v. UNITED STATES.
Decided March 13, 1905.
[197 U.S. 207, 208] Sections 1990 and 5526, Rev. Stat. (U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, pp. 1266, 3715), read:
'Sec. 1990. The holding of any person to service or labor under the system known as peonage is abolished and forever prohibited in the territory of New Mexico, or in any other territory or state of the United States; and all acts, laws, resolutions, orders, regulations, or usages of the territory of New Mexico, or of any other territory or state, which have heretofore established, maintained, or enforced, or by virtue of which any attempt shall hereafter be made to establish, maintain, or enforce, directly or indirectly, the voluntary or involuntary service or labor of any persons as peons, in liquidation of any debt or obligation, or otherwise, are declared null and void.
maybe it's not as strong as i want. but i wanted to make a note of it before i forget. back to my research, at findlaw's annotated constitution.
also 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1584.
and the voice of professor middleton reminds me of jones v meyer.
UNITED STATES v. KOZMINSKI, 487 U.S. 931 (1988), OConnor, 5-4, seems to be the most current 13th A case, and leaves the door open for my argument. update: not 5-4, 5 majority 4 concurring.
arbitrary thought for the day: were the tortured iraqi prisoners subjected to involuntary servitude?
kozminski looks pretty good for my purposes. it discusses the padrone act, which involved probiting the use of italian boy slaves as beggars and street musicians.
that disposes of the idea that only blacks can be slaves.
the concurrance by justice brennanmarshal is pretty good too.
open question, replies to gtbear at gmail dot com, the 16th A., see below, allows for income taxation. is there any level of income tax, 90%, 100%, 110%, where a tax becomes a taking or an involuntary servitude?
update: i've figured out another way i could use this research. i could raise a thirteenth amendment challenge to corporal punishment of school children, as a supporting claim to my 8th amendment "times have changed" challenge to ingraham v wright. plus of course state con equivalents of both.
add in, that case from canada that says parents can only mildly beat their kids... could argue government agents shouldn't be able to molest schoolchildren more severely than canadian parents.
funding proposal - see, blegging already.
i am prepared to reopen ingraham v wright - but only if i have a paying client, like some think tank or foundation.
as readers of my other blogs may be aware,
i'm litigating a free press/speech case.
i was thinking about kids, and how their freedom of expression is violated by curfews. (we have a new curfew statute in indiana.) I wondered if there had been any cases applying the 13th amendment to the status of women. geocities link.
oh, and dad, you were right that the supreme court has upheld the draft as not a 13th a. violation. but the case, from 1922, is not exactly persuasive.
in 1922 the court didn't recognize the constitution as standing for much of anything. (my father is dead. i got from him my stubbornness and that little voice that tells me i'm right, even if the whole world disagrees. it has taken me some 30 years to look up the case, and i now agree he was right, i was wrong, but my comeback is that the court was wrong, and the case is stale. anyway...)
so i'm not finding much yet under the thirteenth amendment, but i did find a statute that outlaws peonage (debt slavery) and involuntary servitude, and i think i could build a case against curfews under the statute. not necessarily a winning case, but not a frivolous one.
SAMUEL M. CLYATT v. UNITED STATES.
Decided March 13, 1905.
[197 U.S. 207, 208] Sections 1990 and 5526, Rev. Stat. (U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, pp. 1266, 3715), read:
'Sec. 1990. The holding of any person to service or labor under the system known as peonage is abolished and forever prohibited in the territory of New Mexico, or in any other territory or state of the United States; and all acts, laws, resolutions, orders, regulations, or usages of the territory of New Mexico, or of any other territory or state, which have heretofore established, maintained, or enforced, or by virtue of which any attempt shall hereafter be made to establish, maintain, or enforce, directly or indirectly, the voluntary or involuntary service or labor of any persons as peons, in liquidation of any debt or obligation, or otherwise, are declared null and void.
maybe it's not as strong as i want. but i wanted to make a note of it before i forget. back to my research, at findlaw's annotated constitution.
also 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1584.
and the voice of professor middleton reminds me of jones v meyer.
UNITED STATES v. KOZMINSKI, 487 U.S. 931 (1988), OConnor, 5-4, seems to be the most current 13th A case, and leaves the door open for my argument. update: not 5-4, 5 majority 4 concurring.
arbitrary thought for the day: were the tortured iraqi prisoners subjected to involuntary servitude?
kozminski looks pretty good for my purposes. it discusses the padrone act, which involved probiting the use of italian boy slaves as beggars and street musicians.
that disposes of the idea that only blacks can be slaves.
the concurrance by justice brennanmarshal is pretty good too.
open question, replies to gtbear at gmail dot com, the 16th A., see below, allows for income taxation. is there any level of income tax, 90%, 100%, 110%, where a tax becomes a taking or an involuntary servitude?
update: i've figured out another way i could use this research. i could raise a thirteenth amendment challenge to corporal punishment of school children, as a supporting claim to my 8th amendment "times have changed" challenge to ingraham v wright. plus of course state con equivalents of both.
add in, that case from canada that says parents can only mildly beat their kids... could argue government agents shouldn't be able to molest schoolchildren more severely than canadian parents.
funding proposal - see, blegging already.
i am prepared to reopen ingraham v wright - but only if i have a paying client, like some think tank or foundation.
Comments:
Post a Comment
