Tax Protestor Irwin Schiff and the IRS

Irwin Schiff passed away in prison last week October 16 upon succumbing to cancer. The reason he was in prison in the first place was because he fought the Internal Revenue Service in the courts since the 1970's and this was not the first time he served a sentence in the prison system for the same reason. His most recent term was simply based on the fact that he trespassed on the U.S. constitution and we will get to that.

Before Mr. Schiff passed away after serving 10 of his 13+ year term, his son Peter Schiff made every attempt for a "compassionate release" so that Irwin could live out the rest of his days with his family. The courts turned every petition down and rightfully so. Irwin did not learn from his mistakes stemming from the 1970's. He continued on the path he was on and refused to comprehend what his mistakes were. The courts extend grace where grace is due and Irwin abused that grace not once, not twice, but several times and over several decades.

Now going back to Irwin's trespass on the U.S. constitution. After my return from Iraq in 2009, I committed myself to understanding government. Like a philosopher believes knowledge is about as critical to life as the air one breathes, so too did I believe the thorough understanding of the historical rabbit hole of government was at least "a key" to freedom. I stumbled upon Irwin's material and saw what he was trying to do. Fascinated, I performed my due diligence on his track record and it quickly became obvious why he ended up back in prison. The "patriots" cried foul, but it was clear why it happened.

Irwin argued in court that the Sixteenth Amendment of the U.S. constitution did not apply to him. While many people might argue this amendment was never properly ratified, silent acquiescence is a form of consent. Today, if you receive a summons to appear in court and you do not appear after receiving proper notification, what happens? The court could enter default against you for your failure to respond and that quickly becomes your problem. That would mean the Sixteenth Amendment did legally pass by the consent of the majority of the states, as no response objecting to the proposed amendment was ever received or objections were not received in time.

Pursuant to Padelford, et al, v. Mayor of the City of Savannah, et al:

"No private person has a right to complain by suit in court on the ground of breach of the United States constitution; for, though the constitution is a compact, he is not a party to it."

If you are not a party to a contract, you do not have a claim of right on that contract and that is exactly where Irwin went wrong. He trespassed on the U.S. constitution and it is partially why he was given such a hefty prison sentence aside from having repeatedly protested taxes previously. Think of someone practicing law without a license. When they practice law and they are not licensed (permitted) by the Bar to practice, they trespass (infringe) on the Bar's copyright to conduct business as a lawyer. It really is as simple as that, it is unfair and unacceptable.