Judge Arcara's PACT ruling...

[myuserid]

Doesn't make sense to me.
Said they don't have to collect taxes, but still can't mail their cigs? That's what I got from it.

That's about what I got from it too.

[snusgetter]

Don't mind at all. I thought it clarified some points that the other article raised. Glad it was of help

There were three additional pieces of information I found of interest:

• Judge Richard Arcara upheld the mail-order ban contained in the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act but temporarily exempted more than 140 Seneca-owned businesses from a provision requiring them to comply with all taxing laws in the places they sell cigarettes.
  ~
  The order will remain in place while a lawsuit claiming the PACT Act is unconstitutional works its way through the court.
  ~
• "The [Seneca] nation urges Seneca business people to continue their court battle — all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, if necessary — to allow mailing of legal tobacco products," [Seneca Nation President Barry] Snyder said.
  ~
• "If Congress possesses the authority to subject out-of-state retailers to every state and local taxing jurisdiction into which their products are delivered, then it has the authority to do so for all commercial products, not just cigarettes," [Judge Richard] Arcara said.

The third issue could have a direct bearing on taxation of internet sales.


We'll just have to keep tabs as the Senecas claw their way through the courts, and hope that other vested interests join with them in their fight.

[Snusdog]

There were three additional pieces of information I found of interest:

• Judge Richard Arcara upheld the mail-order ban contained in the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act but temporarily exempted more than 140 Seneca-owned businesses from a provision requiring them to comply with all taxing laws in the places they sell cigarettes.
  ~
  The order will remain in place while a lawsuit claiming the PACT Act is unconstitutional works its way through the court.
  ~
• "The [Seneca] nation urges Seneca business people to continue their court battle — all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, if necessary — to allow mailing of legal tobacco products," [Seneca Nation President Barry] Snyder said.
  ~
• "If Congress possesses the authority to subject out-of-state retailers to every state and local taxing jurisdiction into which their products are delivered, then it has the authority to do so for all commercial products, not just cigarettes," [Judge Richard] Arcara said.

The third issue could have a direct bearing on taxation of internet sales.


We'll just have to keep tabs as the Senecas claw their way through the courts, and hope that other vested interests join with them in their fight.

Yea those were the three I noted as well. It seems that all this judge was looking at was a temporary injunction to take effect while the law is being challenged by the Seneca Nation.

The injunction asked two thing:
1. While the law is being challenged allow us to continue to ship USPS
2. While the law is being challenged allow us to forgo the state tax collection requirements

The first part of the injunction was denied the second was granted.

That's why at first it did not seem to make any sense to uphold the no USPS but grant no state taxes- the judge was not ruling on the PACT law itself but only on the temporary injunctions the Senecas presented him)

The law will be ruled on by others

This was never the main frount of the battle ground or the real decision we will want to be watching.

[snusgetter]

... The law will be ruled on by others

This was never the main front of the battle ground or the real decision we will want to be watching.

Earlier reports had some of us believing that Judge Arcara
would also be considering the constitutionality of certain
provisions of the PACT Act. Instead, we can now make
sport of trying to follow this latest plight of the Senecas
in the many days, weeks and months ahead.

Thankfully, most of us have our snus to keep us strong!

[Snusdog]

Let me clarify something in my post above

Injunctions very greatly form one injunction to the next. For example you can have a general injunction (based on something like the unconstitutional nature of the law or a treaty violation) which nullifies the law or a particular part of the law for everyone. Or you can have injunctions that are limited in their scope and constituency

This injunction was a limited injunction in that it concerned only a small group of people (42 Seneca Nation retailers). At the same time, it was limited in its scope. It did not seek a ruling on the PACT law itself but only sought a stay of execution while the law was being challenged.

Thus the merits of the PACT were not the primary object of debate here. Rather, the case focused more on what is going on while the challenge is being made. Thus it presented the hardships caused by the law and appealed for leniency during the due process of the challenge.

What I did not know prior to reading the article I posted was the scope of the injunction. The article has made that clear

The challenge itself is what we are waiting for and what we will want to watch. I have not heard when that will be.

Thus the moral of the story: this ruling is non news. And no news in this case is good news

[Joe234]

Not to date myself, but I remember paying
$4.00 a carton or 50 cents for a single pack.

Back then there was no stigma attached...
Ronald Reagan (pronounced reegan back then), John Wayne, Lucille Ball,
The Flintstones were all peddling the coolness/hipness of lighting up!

Were those really the days, my friend?

[texastorm]

You know I ship USPS all the time. One thing I have been wondering the whole time is this. ALll these online smokeshops also sell other products like candy , cigars, and things you can ship. Whats to stop them from slipping a carton of smokes in a box and not declaring it. I read it was no longer allowed, but what is the fine/fee whatever for getting caught? I can find nothing other than confiscation.

I mean if you walk into the Post office and say hey I have this carton of smokes I need to ship to a customer, yeah they will tell you no...but with all the hundreds of packages they get every day, they aren't going to open them all.

Seems like an underground network is due to pop up...hmmm... does this site track by IP... opps strike all that. Lets all follow the law.

[snusgetter]

Confused? Who's confused??

Earlier reports had some of us believing that Judge Arcara
would also be considering the constitutionality of certain
provisions of the PACT Act. Instead, we can now make
sport of trying to follow this latest plight of the Senecas
in the many days, weeks and months ahead.

Thankfully, most of us have our snus to keep us strong!

I knew I had seen this before .. just took time to find it again...


30 June 2010
Climate Change Fraud -
Federal Judge to Obama: "PACT Act violates various
provisions of the Constitution, including the commerce
clause, the 10th amendment, the due-process clause
and the equal protection clause."

[Judge] Arcara found the smoke shop demonstrated it would have
suffered irreparable injury without the restraining order. The judge
also found the retailer demonstrated a likelihood of success on the
merits of its claim that the PACT Act violates various provisions of the
Constitution, including the commerce clause, the 10th amendment,
the due-process clause and the equal protection clause.

In his written order, Arcara said he acted "in the public interest because
the public favors restraining enforcement of statutes that appear to
violate provisions of the Constitution."


Dog, you're right again:
"This ruling [30 July 2010] is non news.
And no news in this case is good news."

Now, let the sparring begin and may
at least some good news ensue!!