On the twenty-seventh day of July, 1979, a defining moment of clarity was
conceived. This single incident would forever put to rest the debate about the
status of the United States Federal Reserve in relation to the UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA. It was on this date that John L. Lewis would start a strong but little
known debate that would culminate in answering the question, "Is the Federal
Reserve actually federal?" Is the Federal Reserve no more "federal" than Federal
Express? Had the word federal been used as a smoke and mirror facade that kept
hidden the true nature of this body of bankers?
Late in July of 1979, John L. Lewis states that he was involved in an incident that
caused him injury. Mr. Lewis states that his injury was caused by a vehicle owned
and operated by the Los Angeles branch of the Federal Reserve Bank of San
Francisco. Lewis sought relief and compensation in district court alleging
jurisdiction under the Federal Tort Claims Act (the Act), 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b). Not
so fast said the UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS, NINTH CIRCUIT.Unfortunately, the
Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco does not fall within what the court calls, by
virtue of the act's own definition, a federal agency within the meaning of the Act
and "that the court therefore lacked subject matter jurisdiction." (JOHN
LEWIS,Plaintiff/Appellant, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant/Appellee.)
What is the definition of a U.S. Federal affiliation that would be covered by the
act? "As used in this chapter and sections 1346(b) and 2401(b) of this title, the
term 'Federal agency' includes the executive departments, the judicial and
legislative branches, the military departments, independent establishments of the
United States, and corporations primarily acting as instrumentalities or agencies of the United States, but does not include any contractor with the United States."
Remember that "includes" in legalese means just the items listed and nothing else.
To clear the waters of the legal mumbo jumbo, approach this definition as to what
the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco isn't rather than what it is. The Federal
Reserve Bank is not, according to this appellate court:
1) Is not an executive department
2) Is not of the judicial and legislative branches
3) Is not the military departments
4) Is not an independent establishment of the United States
5) Is not a corporation primarily acting as an instrument or agency of the United
States
So what is the Federal Reserve, exactly? This court has made it clear what it is
not. An entity that is not "of government" must be private by virtue of definition.
The court further elaborated:"The fact that the Federal Reserve Board regulates the
Reserve Banks does not make them federal agencies under the Act. In United States v. Orleans, 425 U.S. 807, 96 S. Ct. 1971, 48 L. Ed. 2d 390 (1976), the Supreme Court held that a community action agency was not a federal agency or instrumentality for purposes of the Act, even though the agency was organized under federal regulations and heavily funded by the federal government."
The Federal Reserve and it's member banks are not federal nor do they have reserves
for a population deceived into believing that the Federal Reserve benefits them.
(Source: http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F2/680/1239/200393/
http://www.geocities.com/chrisforliberty/lewis.html )
