1st & 14 Amendment Private Member Association
Establish and support your own Private Membership Association through which present and future members of the public become contract members. The membership contract limits claims against you and allows patients to receive the cutting edge services within the protection of the association. This program provides extraordinary privacy protection.
Under the First and Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and equivalent provisions of your State Constitution, you have the right to associate with fellow members. We have used the Medical Practitioner here as an example of the benefits you can gain by forming your own Private Membership. So let us show you how you can form your own Association just like the Boy Scouts and the NAACP just to name a few famous Associations.
As you know, several of your fellow practitioners are being harassed, investigated and sanctioned by licensing agencies, law enforcement agencies and attorney generals in many states. They, of course, believe a great service is being performed in the name of "protection of the public."
The solution to the problem is to change the public patient or client into a private contract member of a Private Medical Membership Association. Under the First and Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and equivalent provisions of your State Constitution, you have the right to associate with fellow members and offer benefits and services that are outside of the jurisdiction, venue and authority of State and/or Federal agencies. What could come under scrutiny and in some cases be considered a criminal act outside the association can be perfectly legal within the protection of a private association.
This right of association is not absolute; the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in many cases that the State cannot interfere with private association activities unless the private members are being subjected to a substantial evil that would shock a person’s moral and common sense. For example, if the private members are becoming seriously ill or injured or dying due to the so-called benefits and services of the association, then outside State and/or Federal agencies can intervene.
However, if there is no substantial evil, and although the services of the private association may be controversial, unpopular, unconventional, or lack proper endorsements and approvals, the U.S. Supreme Court again has overwhelmingly ruled that a freedom of assembly and association cannot be violated.
Eight Reasons for a Private Medical Membership Association
- Eliminate illegal investigations and sanctions by your Licensing Board.
- Practice medicine without paying outrageous malpractice insurance premiums.
- Practice medicine in your chosen area with less risk of malpractice lawsuits and claims.
- Practice medicine without the burden of strict compliance with the Federal HIPAA Laws.
- Practice medicine without the burden of compliance with the Federal Laws dealing with the protection of the public.
- Maintain privacy of business and financial affairs.
- Practice alternative medical modalities without fear of discrimination and sanctions.
- Maintain more freedom and control of your practice.
As a health or medical practitioner you can experience the same peace of mind and legal protection to practice your chosen area without interference or sanctions. If you continue to operate or offer your services to the public and perhaps are selected to be made an example of how the state is "protecting the public," you presently have minimal defense and may not prevail even if you could afford to pay huge legal fees.
LEGAL SYNOPSIS: 1ST AND 14th Amendment Private Membership Associations
Background
While not explicitly defined in the Constitution, the Supreme Court has acknowledged that certain implicit rights, such as association, privacy, and presumed innocence, share constitutional protection in common with explicit guarantees such as free speech. Specifically, the Supreme Court has described the right to associate as inseparable from the right to free speech.
The right of association under the Constitution was heavily litigated in the 1950’s and 1960’s, and members’ rights were consistently upheld by the Court. In fact, the right of association became a cornerstone of the civil rights movement.
In general, members of an association do not fall under the jurisdiction of local, state, and federal governments and corresponding laws and regulations. The exception to this general rule is when the activities of the private membership associates present a clear and present danger of substantive evil. Of interest, an association was even used for purposes of discrimination as evidenced by a recent case involving the Boy Scouts of America.
A simple example of the use of the right to associate to avoid local laws are drinking clubs. Since prohibition was repealed in 1933, regulation of the alcoholic beverage industry was delegated to individual states. Some states, such as Texas, allow individual counties and cities to govern the sale of alcohol. As a result, 46 or Texas’ 254 counties are dry, meaning that sale of alcohol is forbidden. However, by joining a drinking club, members are able to sell alcohol to other members even though local law prohibits this activity. (Consumption of alcohol is neither illegal nor has it been deemed counter to society’s general interest, particularly in the realm of a 1st and 14th Amendment Association.)
It is important to note that the right to associate is not limited to social or political activities. This right can be utilized for business activities (e.g. sale of alcohol). Members of a private membership association have the right to private contract under the due process liberty clause of the 5th and 14th Amendments, and states may not pass laws that impair the obligation of a contract.
Legal Foundation
To understand the legal foundation for this approach, it is helpful to examine the ways in which this approach might be challenged. This approach is typically challenged in two ways:
The first objection is a substance over form argument that states that this approach utilizes association rights for the purpose of avoiding federal or state laws and regulations. While this is a true statement, the ability of an association is well established. The Supreme Court has stated that "a state cannot foreclose the exercise of constitutional rights by mere labels". In other words, the label of "just avoiding state regulation" is not permissible.
Furthermore, the members of a private association have the right to contract with each other and conduct business activities, provided that those activities are not "of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils."
Again, the general rule is that when a private membership association does not raise to the threshold level of a clear and present danger of substantive evil, federal and state governmental authorities and agencies may not interfere with the activities of the association.
The second objection is the assertion that association rights are limited to free speech and advocacy rather than actions (specifically, business activity).
The objection that some persons have for utilizing the 1st and 14th Amendment Private Association for a private association was that association rights were limited to association free speech advocacy, not association actions.
First, let us analyze this objection from reasoned and practical perspective. Free speech advocacy can exist outside of the private association. Considering the context of the association, if free speech is all that can be exercised within the private association, what need would there be to have a private association? The answer is that there would be no need because again, free speech needs no private association to operate.
The U. S. Supreme Court decisions quoted below clearly teach that private association rights are not limited to free speech advocacy, but to private association actions and activities beyond free speech.
The U.S. Supreme Court stated that "In the political realm, as in the academic, thought (speech) and action (beyond speech) are presumptively immune (protected) from inquisition (illegal attack) by political authority (government)." [Explanations added.]
The U.S. Supreme Court stated that, "....abstract discussion (free speech) is not the only species of communication which the Constitution protects vigorous advocacy, certainly of lawful ends, against governmental intrusion." The "vigorous advocacy" here is the action or activity of actual litigation or the actual filing and follow-up of lawsuits. The U.S. Supreme Court further stated that, "In the context of NAACP objectives, litigation is not a technique of resolving private differences; it is a means for achieving equality of treatment…" Note that the Court referred to "litigation" as a "technique", not free speech. Again, the Court stated that, "We need not…subsume such activity (litigation) under a narrow, literal conception of freedom of speech..."
Freedom of Association Involves Freedom of Speech and Activities
The U.S. Supreme Court has again stated, "We have deemed privileged (protected), under certain circumstances (Private Association), the efforts of a union official to organize workers (action). [Explanations added]
Again note that the action of "litigation controlled by laymen" and "a person organizing workers" outside the First and Fourteenth Amendment private association would be illegal with criminal or quasi-criminal penalties and/or sanctions.
Apparently, a person would be mistaken in his objection that private association rights are limited to free speech advocacy and do not include private association actions. The only question remaining is whether "litigation" and "organizing workers" are analogous to performing association services. The answer to that question is another question: Outside of the licensing and regulation jurisdictional context, are association services a lawful activity? The answer is, "Yes, of course!"
The state and federal government in its sovereign capacity is vested with police power which includes the power to protect the public. (Emphasis added.) Note that a "private member" was not included. The exercise of the police power is available only for the purpose of promoting the interests of the public as distinguished from those of individuals or private persons (Emphasis added.)
The 1st and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution give the individual the right to free speech, free expression and free assembly (freedom of association) against state police power except for special circumstances. "…those guarantees of the Bill of Rights which are fundamental safeguards of liberty immune from federal abridgment are equally protected against state invasion…and therefore made immune from state invasion…are First Amendment’s freedoms of speech…assembly, association…" Also, "…the rights to freedom in speech…were coupled in a single guaranty with the rights of the people peaceably to assemble."
In addition, the court held that the "membership lists of the very type here in question to be beyond the state’s power of discovery…" "…the First Amendment does not protect speech and assembly only to the extent it can be characterized as political…And the rights of free speech (and free association) are not confined to any field of human interest." "The idea is not sound therefore that the First Amendment’s safeguards are wholly inapplicable to business or economic activity. In other words, the freedom of association is applied to business and other economic activities (such as advertising and marketing associations).
PROBABLE BENEFITS
- Operate an advertising and marketing association outside the jurisdiction and authority of federal and state government and agencies involving advertising and marketing association activities.
- Maintain greater privacy of financial and business affairs of your advertising and marketing association activities.
- Greater security of being able to continue operation in a world of changing laws and politics.
- Increased profits due to unrestricted and beneficial structuring and strategies not available to regulated advertising and marketing associations.
- Instead of conducting business under a legal loophole, operate under a legal exemption decided by the supreme law of the land, i.e., the Supreme Court decisions interpreting the U.S. Constitution.
Successful Challenges and Defense of Attacks on First and Fourteenth Amendment Private Membership Associations
1.) June, 1977. The Grievance Committee of State Bar of Texas filed a lawsuit against the American Law Association (A Private Legal Membership Association) for unauthorized practice of law and injunctive relief. The case was dismissed on June 1, 1979 for want of prosecution.
2.) August, 1986. The Grievance Committee of State Bar of Texas notified the American Law Association that a lawsuit may be filed for unauthorized practice of law. After several letters, the complaint was dropped.
3.) February, 1990. The Grievance Committee of State Bar of Texas notified the American Law Association that a lawsuit may be filed for unauthorized practice of law. After several letters, the complaint was dropped.
4.) November, 1973. The Texas State Securities Board notified American Law Association that a complaint would be filed charging selling securities without a license. The Board alleged that the membership fees were securities. After providing documentation to the Board, the complaint was dismissed.
5.) March, 1998. The Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee of State Bar of Texas filed a lawsuit and requested injunctive relief against Pro Se Litigants of America (A Private Legal Membership Association). The case was dismissed March 24th, 1990 by Plaintiff’s Notice of Non-Suit and Withdrawal of Motion for Contempt.
6.) December, 2008. The Arkansas State Board of Chiropractic Examiners filed a Complaint against Alphabiotics New Life Center (A Private Medical Membership Association) charging criminal unauthorized practice of medicine. Two (2) letters were sent back to the Board and the Medical Association continued to recruit and operate in the State of Arkansas to date with no further contact from the Board.
7.) October, 2009. The FDA began a civil and criminal investigation against Precision Herbs, L.L.C., an herbal manufacturing and distribution company and completely shut-down the business. After joining ProAdvocate Group, a private legal membership association, the civil and criminal investigation was terminated due to ProAdvocate Group defense strategies and Precision Herbs, L.L.C. became Precision Herbs, (A Private Health Membership Association) which began business in November, 2009 in the private domain. A letter was sent to the FDA informing them that Precision Herbs would be doing business in the private domain and the FDA must respond with proper legal objections within then (10) days or Precision Herbs would continue with the private association business. To date there has been no contact from the FDA or any other state or federal agency.
8.) There have been several other successful defenses and new operations of 1st and 14th Private Health or Medical Membership Associations since October, 2009 involving cases like Precision Herbs who have become members of ProAdvocate Group. These cases are an almost exact duplicate of Precision Herbs and it would be redundant to list them here unless further verification is necessary. Consideration of disclosure of these members will be made after your membership in ProAdvocate Group becomes a reality.
In the last thirty-seven (37) years, while we have successfully defended the 1st and 14th Private Membership Association several times, not one (1) case was lost – we have a 100% batting average!
Whether your business or company wants to face reality or not, if you are doing business with the public and without necessary licensing or an IRB, you may be subject to severe civil and/or criminal sanctions, including prison time.
You have a protected right to change your business to the private domain or realm. Also, you can state publicly what your Private Membership Association can offer to its only private members without disclaimers.
Also, during our thirty-seven (37) years of research, we have found over seventy (70) favorable U.S. Supreme Court cases upholding the principles involved in properly set-up and operated 1st and 14th Amendment Private Membership Associations. There are no cases that have ruled against said associations.
|
|