Right. Then it would be case in equity.
The framers of the Constitution granted the federal courts jurisdiction over both common-law actions and suits in equity. Equity was a centuries-old system of English jurisprudence in which judges based decisions on general principles of fairness in situations where rigid application of common-law rules would have brought about injustice. Judges exercised equitable jurisdiction based on a distinct set of procedures and remedies—most notably, without a jury—that allowed them greater flexibility to hear cases and resolve disputes. The exercise of equity jurisdiction periodically led to debate about the power and discretion of federal judges. --
Legal tender laws prevent every case from being one of equity.
In law, the term "equity" refers to a particular set of remedies and associated procedures involved with civil law. These equitable doctrines and procedures are distinguished from "legal" ones. While legal remedies typically involve monetary damages, equitable relief typically refers to injunctions, specific performance, or vacatur. A court will typically award equitable remedies when a legal remedy is insufficient or inadequate. For example, courts will typically award equitable relief for a claim which involves a particular or unique piece of real estate, or if the plaintiff requests specific performance. -- https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/equity
If we look at the earlier posts based on my blog post, the government has to define in law which of its many putatively valuable creations are money. The Purple Heart, the Congressional Medal awarded to Lindbergh, deeds for the sale of federal land, etc., all look like money objects, but are not money as defined in law for the courts. Just for example, taking a lead from Ayn Rand's "Government Financing in a Free Society," which of the many instruments created by a government would be required to accept in payment for its services? (The easy historical case is: how can you pay your taxes? But we can leave taxation aside. The principle remains. Again, as Rand pointed out, government is the servant of the people, but not the unpaid servant.).
What do you mean by "market value"? I was at a coin show this weekend and silver is through the roof over spot. The US government sells a wide range of gold and silver coins for a wide range of prices. What is the market price of an ounce of gold?
Not to put too fine a point on it, but we all harbor a lot of socialist ideas about money, trade, and commerce because we have been offered not much else in the way of theory. Ludwig von Mises and Karl Marx held to the same theory of historical development for money. The infamous anarcho-capitalist Murray Rothbard said that any bank that was not 100% backed in gold was engaging in fraud. (Leave aside the problem of laws against fraud in his anarchy.) But F. A. Hayek suggested that in a truly free market, one bank could issue its money backed in a market basked of the paper money of other banks. It was just an example, not a proposal. He was only saying that we do not know now how a truly free market will operate in this area because we have not seen one. I believe that we have to clear aside some intellectual clutter from pershaps otherwise well-meaning advocates of the free market.
(Edited by Michael Marotta on 4/27, 3:47pm)