Says second most-popular currency is not violating any law

    EVANSVILLE, Ind., March 20 -- Liberty Dollar
filed suit against the U.S. Mint on Tuesday, March 20 in U.S. District
Court in Evansville, Indiana. The organization -- which promotes and
distributes the new gold and silver currency -- asked the court to declare
that the use of the Liberty Dollar is not a "federal crime," as claimed by
the U.S. Mint. And the organization further asked the court to enter a
permanent injunction against the U.S. Mint requiring it to remove any
reference that the use of Liberty Dollars is a federal crime from its
website.


    The Liberty Dollar organization denies that its more than 100,000
proponents are federal outlaws. It identifies them as law-abiding citizens
who "legally have made the inflation-proof Liberty Dollar America's second
most- popular currency." And the organization demands that the federal
government cease and desist from threatening them.


    The Liberty Dollar group maintains it is protecting the right of every
American to use or barter any "money" they may voluntarily agree to
utilize. They point out that anybody can lawfully barter a dozen eggs for
five pounds of sugar without fear of government interference, as an
example. The group even quotes Andrew Williams, a spokesman for the Federal
Reserve in Washington, D.C., as saying, "There is no law that says goods
and services must be paid for with Federal Reserve notes. Parties entering
into a transaction can establish any medium of exchange that is agreed
upon."


    Bernard von NotHaus, the monetary architect of the Liberty Dollar,
labels the U.S. government/U.S. Mint's allegation that the use of the
Liberty Dollar is criminal as completely misguided. "The Liberty Dollar
organization has never claimed that its new gold and silver currency was a
'coin' or 'legal tender.' For over eight years, the Liberty Dollar has
prospered from the fact that people could use any 'private voluntary
currency' they chose. The Liberty Dollar organization has simply benefited
from the differences between the debt-based U.S. dollar and a value-based
currency." Von NotHaus concludes, "There is absolutely no violation of U.S.
law."


    Von NotHaus points out that the government forced the lawsuit upon
itself. "We had to sue the U.S. Mint, because this unfair and illegal
warning was killing the Liberty Dollar and the ideals it represents. We're
a relatively small group that can't afford to be smeared by the umpteen
billion US dollars of the federal government. It has seriously impacted our
business."


    Von NotHaus finds hope in the fates of other companies who withstood
attacks from the federal government and won. "Just like FedEx, I expect the
Liberty Dollar to win this suit, re-establish sound money, and have the
U.S. government as its biggest customer."