Arbitration services protecting constitutionally secured property rights from deprivation under color of law, pursuant to the Civil Rights Acts and the Federal Arbitration Act of 1925, 43 Stat. 883 (9 U.S.C. §§ 1-16).
Facts and Conclusions of Law Establishing Protection Against Deprivation of Constitutional Rights
The Civil Rights Act of 1866, 14 Stat. 27, Section 1, declared: "All persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power... are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States; and such citizens, of every race and color, without regard to any previous condition of servitude or involuntary servitude... shall have the same right, in every State and Territory in the United States, to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, and give evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property, and to full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property, as is enjoyed by white citizens..."
This Act expressly secured to all citizens the right to the SECURITY OF PERSON AND PROPERTY as a fundamental civil right of citizenship.
This Act further secured the right to MAKE AND ENFORCE CONTRACTS, which includes the right to establish trusts for the protection of property interests.
The Civil Rights Act of 1871, 17 Stat. 13 (42 U.S.C. § 1983), provides: "Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress..."
This Act provides a civil remedy for deprivation of constitutional rights under color of law, treating such rights as compensable property interests that may be vindicated through proper legal proceedings.
The phrase "other proper proceeding for redress" encompasses arbitration as an alternative forum for the resolution of disputes concerning the deprivation of constitutionally secured rights held in trust.
The Enforcement Act of 1870, 16 Stat. 140 (42 U.S.C. § 1981), provides: "All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens..."
This Act reinforces the right to make and enforce contracts, which includes the right to establish trust agreements with arbitration clauses for the protection of constitutionally secured property interests.
The Supreme Court has construed "under color of law" broadly to include any person acting with the apparent authority of state law, even if such conduct is not actually authorized or is in violation of state law.
The Supreme Court in Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167 (1961) established that conduct under color of law means "under pretense" of law and includes actions taken by persons who "possess state authority" regardless of whether such actions violate state law.
Any person who utilizes the constitutional property of another for commercial business without consent and without approval, especially after receiving a cease-and-desist letter, acts under color of law when such conduct is performed under pretense of legal authority or commercial license.
The Supreme Court in Lynch v. Household Finance Corp., 405 U.S. 538, 552 (1972) declared that constitutional rights secured to individuals ARE property interests. Deprivation of such rights constitutes a compensable injury.
The Civil Rights Act of 1871, 17 Stat. 13 (42 U.S.C. § 1983), provides a remedy for any person who subjects another to the deprivation of rights secured by the Constitution and laws, including through "other proper proceeding for redress."
When an individual places constitutionally secured property rights into a trust, such property becomes the trust res — the subject matter of the trust — which the trustee has a fiduciary duty to protect.
A party need not be a signatory to the trust agreement or a member of any contract to be held liable for interference with trust property. The issue is not the party but the PROPERTY — the RIGHT is the subject matter, not the person.
The Civil Rights Act of 1866, 14 Stat. 27, secured the right to "full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property." The trust arrangement is a proper proceeding for the security of constitutional property interests.
The Supreme Court in Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43, 74-75 (1906) declared the individual's "power to contract is unlimited," which includes the power to establish trusts with arbitration clauses for the protection of constitutionally secured property rights.
The Federal Arbitration Act of 1925, 43 Stat. 883 (9 U.S.C. § 2), provides: "A written provision in any... contract evidencing a transaction involving commerce to settle by arbitration a controversy thereafter arising out of such contract or transaction... shall be valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract."
The Supreme Court in Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp., 460 U.S. 1, 24-25 (1983) established that the Federal Arbitration Act creates "a body of federal substantive law of arbitrability" and requires courts to "rigorously enforce agreements to arbitrate."
Individuals whose property interests are held in trust may petition the arbitrator for disposition of controversies arising from deprivation of civil rights under color of law.
The Hayden Covington Arbitration Association provides arbitration services for individuals whose constitutionally secured property rights have been deprived under color of law or through unauthorized commercial use without consent.
The arbitration is conducted pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act of 1925, 43 Stat. 883 (9 U.S.C. §§ 1-16), and constitutes an "other proper proceeding for redress" as contemplated by the Civil Rights Act of 1871, 17 Stat. 13 (42 U.S.C. § 1983).
The trustee, whose duty it is to protect the trust res, may petition the arbitrator on behalf of the beneficiary for disposition of the controversy and determination of liability for deprivation of civil rights.
Any presumption that a non-signatory to the trust agreement cannot be held liable for interference with trust property is rebutted by the express language of the Civil Rights Act of 1871, 17 Stat. 13, which imposes liability upon "Every person" who subjects another to the deprivation of constitutional rights. The PROPERTY is the subject matter — the RIGHT is what has been interfered with — and any person who utilizes that property without consent subjects themselves to the protective mechanisms established by the trust, including arbitration.
support@tcaa.online
Confidential consultation available
304 S. Jones Blvd. #Void-Eeon
Las Vegas, Nevada 89107