Arbitration services protecting the constitutional liberty of contract and the right to establish trusts for the protection of constitutionally secured property interests, operating under the Federal Arbitration Act of 1925, 43 Stat. 883 (9 U.S.C. §§ 1-16).
Facts and Conclusions of Law Establishing the Constitutional Right to Contract for Property Protection
The Supreme Court in Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43, 74-75 (1906) declared: "The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is UNLIMITED. He owes no duty to the State or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to criminate him."
This holding establishes as a conclusion of law that the individual's power to contract is UNLIMITED — without bounds or restrictions — and includes the power to establish trusts, enter arbitration agreements, and create any lawful arrangement for the protection of property interests.
The Supreme Court in Allgeyer v. Louisiana, 165 U.S. 578, 589 (1897) declared: "The liberty mentioned in that amendment means not only the right of the citizen to be free from the mere physical restraint of his person, as by incarceration, but the term is deemed to embrace the right of the citizen to be free in the enjoyment of all his faculties, to be free to use them in all lawful ways, to live and work where he will, to earn his livelihood by any lawful calling, to pursue any livelihood or avocation, and for that purpose to enter into all contracts which may be proper, necessary, and essential to his carrying out to a successful conclusion the purposes above mentioned."
This establishes the constitutional foundation for the right of individuals to enter into trust agreements and arbitration contracts as an exercise of the liberty of contract secured by the Constitution.
The Civil Rights Act of 1866, 14 Stat. 27, Section 1, secured to all citizens "the same right, in every State and Territory in the United States, to make and enforce contracts."
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."
These Acts establish that the right to make and enforce contracts — including trust agreements with arbitration clauses — is a fundamental civil right of citizenship protected by federal law.
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: "The dichotomy between personal liberties and property rights is a false one... In fact, a fundamental interdependence exists between the personal right to liberty and the personal right in property."
The combination of these authorities establishes that individuals possess the constitutional right to:
FIRST: Recognize that constitutional rights are property interests belonging to the individual.
SECOND: Exercise the unlimited power to contract for the protection of those property interests.
THIRD: Place such property interests into trust arrangements, making them the trust res.
FOURTH: Include arbitration clauses in such trust agreements for the resolution of disputes concerning the trust res.
The trust agreement places constitutionally secured property rights into trust as the trust res and contains protective provisions including arbitration clauses for dispute resolution.
The arbitration clause requires all disputes concerning the trust res to be resolved through binding arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act of 1925, 43 Stat. 883 (9 U.S.C. §§ 1-16).
The Federal Arbitration Act of 1925, 43 Stat. 883 (9 U.S.C. § 2), provides: "A written provision in any maritime transaction or a contract evidencing a transaction involving commerce to settle by arbitration a controversy thereafter arising out of such contract or transaction, or the refusal to perform the whole or any part thereof, or an agreement in writing to submit to arbitration an existing controversy arising out of such a contract, transaction, or refusal, 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: "Section 2 is a congressional declaration of a liberal federal policy favoring arbitration agreements... The Arbitration Act establishes that, as a matter of federal law, any doubts concerning the scope of arbitrable issues should be resolved in favor of arbitration."
The Court further stated that the FAA creates "a body of federal substantive law of arbitrability, applicable to any arbitration agreement within the coverage of the Act" and requires courts to "rigorously enforce agreements to arbitrate."
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.
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, interferes with trust property and subjects themselves to the protective mechanisms established by the trust, including arbitration.
The arbitration concerns the trust res itself — the constitutionally secured property rights held in trust — and third parties who interfere with such property submit to arbitration by their conduct, not by contract.
Individuals who have exercised the liberty of contract to place property interests in trust may petition the arbitrator for disposition of controversies arising from interference with trust property.
The A1 SALES Arbitration Association provides arbitration services for individuals whose constitutionally secured property rights have been interfered with, vindicating the liberty of contract and the right to establish trusts for property protection.
The arbitration is conducted pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act of 1925, 43 Stat. 883 (9 U.S.C. §§ 1-16), which establishes that written arbitration agreements "shall be valid, irrevocable, and enforceable."
The trustee, whose fiduciary 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 interference with trust property.
Any presumption that an individual lacks the authority to establish trusts for the protection of constitutional property rights, or that such trust agreements with arbitration clauses are not enforceable against non-signatories who interfere with trust property, is rebutted by the Supreme Court's express holdings that the individual's power to contract is UNLIMITED (Hale, 201 U.S. at 74-75), that constitutional rights ARE property interests (Lynch, 405 U.S. at 552), and that the Federal Arbitration Act reflects a "liberal federal policy favoring arbitration agreements" (Moses H. Cone, 460 U.S. at 24-25). The PROPERTY is the subject matter — not the contractual relationship between parties.
support@tcaa.online
Filings Only
304 S. Jones Blvd. #Void-Eeon
Las Vegas, Nevada 89107