Kenneth Prewett, Director of the Bureau of the Census writes:

``Your privacy is protected by law (Title 13 of the United States Code), which also requires that you answer these questions.''

``That law ensures that your information is only used for statistical purposes and that no unauthorized person can see your form or find out what you tell us - no other government agency, no court of law, NO ONE.''

Mr. Prewett is Mistaken

November 26, 1941

Grace Tully (Roosevelt's secretary) told Henry Field (anthropologist and aide to Roosevelt) that the President was ordering him to produce, in the shortest time possible, the full names and addresses of each American-born and foreign-born Japanese listed by locality within each state. She told him to use the 1930 and 1940 census.

Report of the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians; Joan Z. Bernstein, Chair; Personal Justice Denied; Washington, D.C.; )1982; p.104-5.

February 19, 1942

President Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066, authorizing the secretary of war to define military areas "from which any or all persons may be excluded as deemed necessary or desirable." The only significant opposition would come from the Quakers (Society of Friends) and the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union).

As a result, thousands of Japanese-Americans were confined to concentration camps for the duration of World War II. The law ``ensures'' nothing.

Authority

This Constitution and the Laws made in Pursuance thereof... shall be the supreme Law of the Land...all Judges shall be bound thereby...any Thing...to the Contrary notwithstanding. Article VI, Clause 2, of the Constitution of the United States of America (1789).

The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void. . .unconstitutional law bears no power to enforce, it purports to settle as if it never existed, for unconstitutionality dates from the enactment of such a law and not such time as branded in an open court of law. . .it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed. No courts are bound to uphold it and no persons are bound to obey it. 16 Am Jur 256.

The Fourth and Fifth Amendments were described in Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616, 630, as protection against all governmental invasions ``of the sanctity of a man's home and the privacies of life.'' We recently referred [381 U.S. 479, 485] in Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 656, to the Fourth Amendment as creating a ``right to privacy, no less important than any other right carefully and particularly reserved to the people.'' GRISWOLD v. CONNECTICUT, 381 U.S. 479 (1965)

Declaration

I hereby affirm that the provisions of Title 13 ``requiring'' me to disclose my race, personal financial data, birthdate, or any other personal, private information to the Bureau of the Census, an agency of the United States government; constitutes an unreasonable, unwarranted search of my person, house, papers, and/or effects; and a governmental invasion of the sanctity of my home and the privacies of life. As such, these provisions violate the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution, and are thus wholly void and I am not bound to obey them.

I have completed the only those sections of the Census form pertaining to the Constitutionally-mandated actual enumeration, as follows:

1.The actual number of people living at the address printed on the form, excluding untaxed Native Americans; 2.Age of each person in accordance with US Const. Amendment XIV, Section 2. 3.Sex of each person, in accordance with US Const. Amendment XIV, Section 2.

I have thus fulfilled my obligation to the attainment of the actual enumeration of the populace of the United States.

Any fine or other sanction that is levied by any office or organization stemming from the unconstitutional provisions of Title 13 in connection with my response to this or any other Census-related questioning will be challenged in a court of law.

-- ... (...@...com), March 17, 2000

Answers

If the general population feels like the people who have posted here, I would imagine there could be some class action law challenges. Seems like there are some real unresolved legal issues.

-- suzy (suzy@nowhere.com), March 17, 2000.

Go for it ..@...that which is not forbidden is mandatory.

-- Donna (moment@home.com), March 17, 2000.

@....I don't think you go far enough...The census is a sham...the TV ads..."money for your community?" I am refusing to be abused...the black box on the front of the envelope told me so...YOUR RESPONSE IS REQUIRED BY LAW Good enough for me. Circular file. How long do you folks think that government's intimidation and coercion will work in the new age? Just an errant question.

-- Donna (moment@home.com), March 17, 2000.

Nt just yes,but.......HELL YES!!!!!!!!

It's good to know I'm not the only one thats sick of this type of coersion.

-- capnfun (capnfun1@excite.com), March 17, 2000.

Donna,

Congratulations on your principles and your courage. But..... "whatcha gonna do when they come for you"?

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), March 17, 2000.

Lars,

They can't come for you,all they can do is fine you.At that point you can either pay or refuse,then they could come for you,but that would be a PR nightmare.

-- capnfun (capnfun1@excite.com), March 17, 2000.