According to this Doc,

United States did go "Bankrupt" in 1933 and was declared so by President Roosevelt by Executive Orders 6073, 6102, 6111 and by Executive Order 6260 on March 9, 1933, under the "Trading With The Enemy Act" of October 6, 1917, AS AMENDED by the Emergency Banking Relief Act, 48 Stat 1, Public Law No. 1, which is presently codified at 12 USCA 95a and confirmed at 95b.

Thereafter, Congress confirmed the bankruptcy on June 5, 1933, and thereupon impaired the obligations and considerations of contracts through the "Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard And Abrogate The Gold clause, June 5, 1933" (See: HJR-192, 73rd Congress, 1st Session). When the Courts were called upon to rule on various of the provisions designed to implement and compliment FDR's Emergency BANKING Relief Act of March 9, 1933, they were all found unconstitutional, so what FDR did was simply stack the "Court's" with HIS chosen obsequious members of the bench/bar and then sent many of the cases back through and REVERSED the rulings.

House Joint Resolution 192 (HJR-192), 48 Stat. 112, was passed by Congress on June 5, 1933. The 'Act' impaired the obligations and considerations of contacts and declared that the notes of the Federal Reserve banks were "legal tender" for the payment of both public and private debts, and that payment in gold Coin was against "public policy". (In effect, FDR and Congress, under executive orders and legislative fiat, nationalized the people's money, i.e., their gold Coin. Nationalization is a violation of the Law of Nations and existing public policy of Congress. See: Hilton vs. Guyot, 159 U.S. 113 (1895). The gold Coin that was confiscated (nationalized) was later used to purchase voting stockholder shares in The Bank and The Fund at $35 per ounce.) At this point in time, "Fair Market Value", i.e., a willing seller and buyer, without compulsion, lost any substantial meaning.

Moreover, all of the Governor's of the several States of the Union, who were summoned to and were in Washington, D.C. during the several days of this pre-planned economic "Emergency" (the first phase of which was to nationalize and expropriate the people's Money, i.e., their gold Coin on deposit in the banks), pledged the full faith and credit thereof to the aid of the National Government, and formed various socialist committees, such as the "Council of State Governments", "Social Security Administration", etc., to purportedly deal with the economic "Emergency." The Council of State Governments has been absorbed into such things as the National Conference Of Commissioners On Uniform State Laws, whose headquarters is located in Chicago, Illinois, and "all" being "members of the Bar", and operating under a different "Constitution and By-Laws", far distant from the depositories of the public records, and it is this organization that has promulgated, lobbied for, passed, adjudicated and ordered the implementation and execution of their purported "Uniform" and "Model" Acts and pretended statutory provisions, in order to "help implement international treaties of the United States or where world uniformity would be desirable." (1990/91 Reference Book, NCCUSL). These organizations operate under the "Declaration of INTERdependence" of January 22, 1937, and published some of their activities in "The Book Of The States." The 1937 Edition openly declares that the people engaged in such activities as the Farming/Husbandry Industry had been reduced to mere feudal "Tenants" on the Land they supposedly owned.

On April 25, 1938, the supreme Court overturned the standing precedents of the prior 150 years concerning "common law," in the federal government.

"THERE IS NO FEDERAL COMMON LAW, and CONGRESS HAS NO POWER TO DECLARE SUBSTANTIVE RULES OF COMMON LAW applicable IN A STATE, WHETHER they be LOCAL or GENERAL in their nature, be they COMMERCIAL LAW OR a part of the LAW OF TORTS." -- Erie Railroad Co. vs. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64, 82 L.Ed. 1188.

So is the United States Bankrupt?

  • 2
    Do a lot of people believe this? – Sklivvz May 29 '15 at 19:16
  • 1
    The word "bankrupt" is mentioned twice: the first time it's in scare quotes so maybe that just an analogy or parable or euphemism or something like that, IOW I doubt we're meant to interpret/understand that literally. – ChrisW May 29 '15 at 20:29
  • 2
    @ChrisW: Agreed. Unless there is a clear definition of "bankruptcy" as it's used in this claim, this question isn't any more answerable than "Is the United States happy?" – Nate Eldredge May 29 '15 at 20:43
  • 7
    @Axelrod A person spending more than their income every year would not be considered bankrupt if he had enough assets to cover the debt. Which (surprise!) nations do. – DJClayworth May 30 '15 at 3:04
  • 1
    Even if, bizarrely, it could be shown that the US was bankrupt in 1938, that would not make them bankrupt now. – DJClayworth May 30 '15 at 3:05

This claim is utter and complete bollocks.

Of the presidential decrees which it is claimed declare the US to be bankrupt:

Not one of them mentions bankruptcy or anything similar. The remaining motions all touch on similar themes.

Given the running theme of the decrees cited, I would assume that the document you quote is the work of gold standard fanatics, who believe that all the US financial problems (and probably many others) are a direct result of leaving the gold standard, and that the US 'stole' its people's gold when it substituted fiat money for gold-backed currency. Bankruptcy to such people means that the US no longer has sufficient physical gold to exchange everybody's paper money if they all tried to do so at once, a definition which is not followed by any nation or institution. The claim also refers to the Council of State Governments as a 'socialist committee', which gives you an idea of the color of spectacles it is using to view the world.

The technical definition of bankruptcy is that of an entity having debts larger than its assets. There is nothing in the claim cited that indicates this to be true, and given the size of US government assets would be extremely unlikely.

  • +1 for "complete bollocks". I would disagree on your definition of bankruptcy. I would rather say that bankruptcy is a legal state, designed to fairly distribute assets to creditors in the event of insolvency, with your given definition being a spot on definition of "balance sheet" insolvency (as opposed to "cash-flow" insolvency). – sharur Jun 20 '16 at 23:03
  • 4
    From the Wiki: "Bankruptcy is a legal status of a person or other entity that cannot repay the debts it owes to creditors." An entity may have a negative net worth, but not be considered bankrupt. So that start of your last paragraph is a bit off, otherwise good answer. – Pete B. Aug 7 '17 at 15:47
  • "technical definition" +1. I can tell you how many trillions we owe China, but the assets of the US is probably numbered in whatever's after quadrillion. – Mazura Jan 29 at 17:22

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .