- Whoops! I just stumbled across this.Just wanted people's opinions of the following highlighted statement. This act has never been canceled and has numerous precedents. Although the context is a separate and valid concept, the first statement, by law, stands alone. Regardless of interpretation for anti-trust litigation the stated reference is a congressionally approved mandate and should thusly be construed to have the same meaning and authority in any and all lawful acts, even the IRS (Title 26).The Clayton Antitrust Act (1914) The Clayton Antitrust Act is comprised of §§ 12, 13, 14- (17) 19, 20, 21, 22-27 of Title 15.
Note also that §§ 13a, 13b, and 21a comprise the "Robinson-Patman Price Discrimination Act" (1936). Sections 15c-15h, and 18a compromise part of the "Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976."
The labor of a human being is not a commodity or article of commerce. Nothing contained in the antitrust laws shall be construed to forbid the existence and operation of labor, agricultural, or horticultural organizations, instituted for the purposes of mutual help, and not having capital stock or conducted for profit, or to forbid or restrain individual members of such organizations from lawfully carrying out the legitimate objects thereof; nor shall such organizations, or the members thereof, be held or construed to be illegal combinations or conspiracies in restraint of trade, under the antitrust laws.The issue then is how some one would consider payment for something that is not a commodity or in commerce, income, when income itself must be in commerce.John-Chester: Stuart: sovereign without subjects
c/o postal service location
21001 N. Tatum Blvd. Suite 1630472
Phoenix, Arizona republic cf 85050 cf
See what's free at AOL.com.