Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: ransomnote

No probable cause. Unconstitutional


6 posted on 05/08/2021 2:49:00 AM PDT by faithhopecharity ("Politicians are not born, they are excreted." Marcus Tullius Cicero (106 to 43 BCE))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: faithhopecharity

It gets more complicated when you are dealing with a third party. Your home and property are protected under the Constitution, but when you have records and possessions in the hands of a third party like a friend or an investment manager it’s a different story.


8 posted on 05/08/2021 2:52:14 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("And once in a night I dreamed you were there; I canceled my flight from going nowhere.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: faithhopecharity

(No probable cause. Unconstitutional)

Funny. You still think that overlords give a damn about constitutionality??


13 posted on 05/08/2021 3:00:03 AM PDT by winner3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: faithhopecharity
No probable cause. Unconstitutional

How can you say that?!

Rather, according to the court’s order, the summons seeks information related to the IRS’s “investigation of an ascertainable group or class of persons” that the IRS has reasonable basis to believe “may have failed to comply with internal revenue laws.”

Aren't the police routinely allowed to enter your premises, search your personal papers, and rummage through your wife's lingerie drawer on the suspicion that some ill-defined "wrong-doing" (= "non-compliance") might be going on?

After all, you exist, and it can therefore be reasonably assumed that you may have failed - at some point in your life - to comply with at least one of the 50,000 statutes, ordinances, and requirements of the federal government's tax code.

Regards,

18 posted on 05/08/2021 3:11:08 AM PDT by alexander_busek (Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: faithhopecharity

That old thing? That went out with “voting rights”.


30 posted on 05/08/2021 4:22:31 AM PDT by VTenigma (The Democrat party is the party of the mathematically challenged )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: faithhopecharity

That old thing? That went out with “voting rights”.


31 posted on 05/08/2021 4:22:31 AM PDT by VTenigma (The Democrat party is the party of the mathematically challenged )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: faithhopecharity

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

John Doe is not a person, and they know it. This subpoena is blatantly unconstitutional.

What is the oath? “give me all the records, because I am guessing that someone cheated on their taxes.”


37 posted on 05/08/2021 5:03:33 AM PDT by Triple (Socialism denies people the right to the fruits of their labor, and is as abhorrent as slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson