a federal statute passed under the taxing power may be so arbitrary and capricio
I think this quote applies to the Individual Master File and the errors in it everyone has:
a statute which imposes a tax upon an assumption of fact which the taxpayer is forbidden to controvert, is so arbitrary and unreasonable that it cannot stand under the Fourteenth Amendment. Nor is it material that the Fourteenth Amendment was involved in the Schlesinger case, instead of the Fifth Amendment, as here. The restraint imposed upon legislation by the due process clauses of the two amendments is the same. Coolidge v. Long, 282 U.S. 582, 596. That a federal statute passed under the taxing power may be so arbitrary and capricious as to cause it to fall before the due process of law clause of the Fifth Amendment is settled. Nichols v. Coolidge, 274 U.S. 531, 542; Brushaber v. Union Pac. R. Co., 240 U.S. 1, 24-25; Tyler v. United States, supra, p. 504. HEINER v. DONNAN ET AL., 1932.SCT.40252 <http://www.versuslaw.com>¶ 49; 285 U.S. 312 (1932).
Phone Contact: 720-675-7230
Best times to call: 8:30 am-9:00 pm MST
firstname.lastname@example.org to join Tips & Tricks for Court Group