The Gold Standard: A Misunderstanding of US Constitutional Law

Recently, an interesting discussion has surfaced regarding the legality of removing gold as a form of payment, despite the US Constitution. Many argue that the government shouldn't be able to do so because the Constitution says otherwise, thus highlighting a misunderstanding of US constitutional law. Let's delve into the facts.

Understanding the Misconception

It is deeply concerning to see individuals who are either Russians or educated in poor red states with a lack of proper education in US history. They are under the false impression that the US government suddenly removed gold as a form of payment. However, this belief is based on a significant misunderstanding of the US Constitution and its historical context.

The confusion often stems from the fact that the Nixon administration removed the US from the Gold Standard. This was a decision made at the federal level, not a result of constitutional law, but rather a response to the financial and economic challenges of the time.

The Constitution and Minting Rights

It's crucial to note that the Constitution indeed prohibits states from creating their own paper currencies. However, individual states have the authority to mint their own coinage, as long as it is done under federal oversight. Currently, the federal government continues to mint various gold and silver coins, including American Gold Eagles, American Gold Buffalos, American Silver Eagles, American Platinum Eagles, American Palladium Eagles, and commemorative quarters and half dollars.

While individual states can hold and promote precious metals, they are legally bound to use the US dollar for state-level transactions. The Constitution itself does not require the federal government to use only gold or silver coins as currency. It merely prohibits states from creating their own paper money without federal approval.

The Reality of Current Legislation

The reality is that there is no effort to remove gold from as a form of payment in the US. On the contrary, states are actively promoting gold and silver coins as valuable assets. This is reflected in the current legislative landscape, where coin collectors and precious metal enthusiasts are clamoring for the recognition of these coins as legitimate forms of wealth.

For instance, many states are currently debating and implementing laws that treat gold and silver as non-taxable items. This is a testament to the belief in precious metals as a valuable asset that can serve as a hedge against economic uncertainty.

The Role of Congress and Constitutional Interpretation

The removal of the Gold Standard was a significant policy decision made by the federal government, specifically Congress, without any constitutional requirement. The decision was made in response to the economic climate of the 1970s, particularly the high inflation rates and the need to maintain a stable economy.

Congress has the authority to interpret the Constitution and make laws that reflect the changing needs of society. The failure to address special interests and the lack of political will to strictly adhere to the original intentions of the Constitution do not negate the government's power to enact such policies.

Conclusion

The US Constitution is a fundamental document that shapes the legal framework of the country. However, it is a short document that requires careful reading and interpretation. The gold standard issue is a prime example of how even well-intentioned individuals can misunderstand constitutional law. By educating ourselves on constitutional history and current legal frameworks, we can promote a more informed and nuanced discussion on these important topics.

The US Constitution does not require the use of a gold standard. The government has the authority to enact and change monetary policies to best serve the economic needs of the nation. The current promotion and holding of precious metals by individual states reflect a belief in their value, not an effort to replace the US dollar system.