# How was the seizure of gold in 1933 constitutional? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 27, 2011, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-was-the-seizure-of-gold-in-1933-constitutional/600989 "2011-10-27T17:37:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2011, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-was-the-seizure-of-gold-in-1933-constitutional/600989/1 "2011-10-27T17:37:49Z")
Reading about [Executive Order 6102](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102) and the [Gold Reserve Act of 1934](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_Reserve_Act), I can’t see how seizing privately owned gold is not a violation of the 5th Amendment. There is no public use so eminent domain doesn’t apply. What would prevent the government from making ownership of (let’s say) aluminum illegal, setting a price at $0.005 a pound and then forcing Americans to sell their aluminum to the government at that price? ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2011, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-was-the-seizure-of-gold-in-1933-constitutional/600989/2 "2011-10-27T18:36:14Z")
I am not an American Constitutional Law expert, but IIRC there were challengers, and the US Supreme Court dismissed them on standing and jurisidction issues as well as holding that the 1934 Act was within Plenary powers of the Congress. [Perry v United States](http://supreme.justia.com/us/294/330/case.html) is the one case I remember, I think they were others. Some US Law dopers could explain further. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2011, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-was-the-seizure-of-gold-in-1933-constitutional/600989/3 "2011-10-27T18:43:00Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > I am not an American Constitutional Law expert, but IIRC there were challengers, and the US Supreme Court dismissed them on standing and jurisidction issues as well as holding that the 1934 Act was within Plenary powers of the Congress. > > [Perry v United States](http://supreme.justia.com/us/294/330/case.html) > is the one case I remember, I think they were others. Some US Law dopers could explain further. But that applied to the use of gold as a medium of money and I can see how the U.S. Government has the authority to do that and that the court cases were whether or not the Government can in effect force parties to rewrite contracts after the fact. What I’m talking about is governmental seizure of private property. ---
**Author:** ![Keeve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f07891/32.png) [@Keeve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Keeve)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2011, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-was-the-seizure-of-gold-in-1933-constitutional/600989/4 "2011-10-27T18:49:41Z")
I don’t think they actually siezed the gold. They required you to sell your gold to the gov’t at fair market rates. I imagine that it was similar to “condemning” a piece of land for some gov’t project. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2011, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-was-the-seizure-of-gold-in-1933-constitutional/600989/5 "2011-10-27T19:03:57Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > But that applied to the use of gold as a medium of money and I can see how the U.S. Government has the authority to do that and that the court cases were whether or not the Government can in effect force parties to rewrite contracts after the fact. What I’m talking about is governmental seizure of private property. I don’t think it comes under the term “seizure of private property”, the gold that was to be surrendered was simply money, a currency like anyother. It would not be any different (if I have understood the case correctly) if the US Government had banned US nationals from having foreign currecny like the Sterling and ordered that all sterling banknotes be surrendered to the US treasury in return for dollars at the rate of exchange, that would be undoubtedly within powers. And note that actual private property which was in gold, such as jewellery and works of art were exempt. ---
**Author:** ![Condescending\_Robot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a183cd/32.png) [@Condescending\_Robot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Condescending_Robot)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2011, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-was-the-seizure-of-gold-in-1933-constitutional/600989/6 "2011-10-27T19:18:32Z")
Nothing. The Fifth Amendment clause against takings has been made effectively toothless by unfavorable Supreme Court rulings. The incident described was allowed to stand for the same reason as the rest of the New Deal; enough people believed that it was worth violating the Constitution for that nobody, as a practical matter, could stop them, and Roosevelt was already prepared to destroy the Supreme Court if it tried. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2011, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-was-the-seizure-of-gold-in-1933-constitutional/600989/7 "2011-10-27T19:41:13Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > I don’t think it comes under the term “seizure of private property”, the gold that was to be surrendered was simply money, a currency like anyother. It would not be any different (if I have understood the case correctly) if the US Government had banned US nationals from having foreign currecny like the Sterling and ordered that all sterling banknotes be surrendered to the US treasury in return for dollars at the rate of exchange, that would be undoubtedly within powers. And note that actual private property which was in gold, such as jewellery and works of art were exempt. So if I stacked all of my gold coins together and called it “Art Piece: Avarice”, I could have kept it? Furthermore, even if I agree that the government had a right to require the gold coins to be redeemed under it’s Constitutional authority, you completely neglect that a gold coin is private property qua a disk of metal. I should be allowed to hold on to it as gold even if it loses all value as a unit of currency e.g. melt it into a bar. But possessing gold of ANY kind [was illegal](http://www.enotes.com/major-acts-congress/gold-reserve-act). > [@](#): > > On August 29, by executive order, the secretary of the treasury was to receive all newly mined gold of domestic origin. On August 28, by another executive order, anyone other than a Federal Reserve Bank was forbidden from acquiring or holding gold in the United States or exporting gold (except under license). Finally, on December 28, 1933, the secretary of the treasury ordered that all gold be delivered to it at the official price of $20.67 per ounce. The process of nationalization of gold was complete. So that nugget of gold I found in the river? I had to turn it in to the government.