Opinion ID: 705140
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: the thirteenth amendment challenge

Text: 31 Mack also challenges the Brady Act as violating the Thirteenth Amendment. The Thirteenth Amendment provides that [n]either slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime ... shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. U.S. Const. amend. XIII. According to Mack, section 922(s) requires him to perform labor for the United States or face legal sanctions, even though he is not a federal employee. 32 Unlike a slave, however, Mack can quit work at any time. By doing so, he escapes all compulsion. The requirements of the Brady Act are not placed on Mack personally; the duties that are imposed attend the office. Thus the Brady Act does not coerce Mack by improper or wrongful conduct into service by causing and intending to cause him to believe that he ... has no alternative but to perform the labor. Brogan v. San Mateo County, 901 F.2d 762, 764 (9th Cir.1990) (citation omitted). The fact that Mack, if he continues to be sheriff, must perform certain duties as a condition of his employment, does not violate the Thirteenth Amendment. Cf. United States v. 30.64 Acres of Land, 795 F.2d 796, 800-01 (9th Cir.1986) (requiring lawyers to perform pro bono services does not violate Thirteenth Amendment because requirement is a condition of practicing law).