383

The Supreme Court case seeking to shut down wealth taxes before they even exist (www.vox.com)

submitted 11 months ago by spaceghoti@lemmy.one to c/politics@lemmy.world

161 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The plaintiffs’ arguments in Moore v. United States have little basis in law — unless you think that a list of long-ago-discarded laissez-faire decisions from the early 20th century remain good law. And a decision favoring these plaintiffs could blow a huge hole in the federal budget. While no Warren-style wealth tax is on the books, the Moore plaintiffs do challenge an existing tax that is expected to raise $340 billion over the course of a decade.

But Republicans also hold six seats on the nation’s highest Court, so there is some risk that a majority of the justices will accept the plaintiffs’ dubious legal arguments. And if they do so, they could do considerable damage to the government’s ability to fund itself.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] spaceghoti@lemmy.one 61 points 11 months ago

That's why they've been stacking the courts with conservative activists for so long, so they could get a majority that would go along with these paper-thin justifications for completely changing our society from the top down.

[-] Zombiepirate@lemmy.world 37 points 11 months ago

Well said.

The stated goal of "originalism" is to read the Constitution without interpretation.

Which would be bad enough, since it was written by a bunch of slavers without any input from women whatsoever.

But in reality it is impossible to read something (especially law) without interpretation; they simply start with the desired conclusion and look for any historical justification no matter how implausible.

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

But in reality it is impossible to read something (especially law) without interpretation

Some people might see that as a challenge, so I'd state it even more bluntly: reading is interpretation. Reading without interpretation is not just impossible; it's an oxymoron.

[-] SheDiceToday@eslemmy.es 2 points 11 months ago

I would hope every single high school graduate could remember the simple pictograph of how communication works:

Person A has an idea -
Person A encodes the idea and transmits it -
Person B receives the transmission and decodes it -
Person B has the idea-
Reverse the process for feedback and confirmation of idea -

That encoding bit is pretty important...

[-] Daft_ish@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

So cool, because this is also how tcp/ip works.

this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2023

383 points (99.0% liked)

politics

19072 readers

1907 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News