Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Witnesses cite constitutional authority and Supreme Court cases to justify state gold policy
Summary
Public witnesses and commenters argued states have constitutional authority to recognize gold and silver as legal tender and cited Supreme Court decisions; the treasurer and committee noted tax and regulatory constraints that remain unresolved.
Multiple witnesses cited the Constitution and past court rulings to support the idea that states can accept gold and silver as legal tender. Kevin Freeman and others referenced cases such as Lane County v. Oregon and Briscoe v. Bank of Kentucky as part of a broader legal argument that states retain authority to use gold as money.
The treasurer stressed operational and tax realities: while states may assert certain authorities, IRS policy treats gold as a capital asset and would create taxable events for transactions unless federal treatment changes. The committee did not issue legal findings; speakers' citations of cases and constitutional authority were presented as part of advocacy and should be reviewed by legal counsel before any broader policy changes.
