Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: lucysmom

Dear lucysmom,

I was under the impression that the Supreme Court had eventually struck down the income tax imposed mid-19th century, and that it is the 16th Amendment that gave constitutional authority for it.

If you have an alternative narrative, I'd appreciate reading about it.

However, even if mere repeal of the 16th Amendment doesn't do the trick, that could be fixed by making the language of the repeal amendment sufficiently explicit in forbidding the income tax.


sitetest


237 posted on 09/24/2006 10:12:57 AM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies ]


To: sitetest; lucysmom

The language of any repeal amendment would have to include specific language barring income taxes from being levied.

There is not a snowball's chance in h3ll of 38 states getting rid of the power of the federal government to charge income taxes on the evil rich. Not gonna happen.


238 posted on 09/24/2006 10:18:35 AM PDT by RobFromGa (The FairTax cult is like Scientology, but without the movie stars)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies ]

To: sitetest
I was under the impression that the Supreme Court had eventually struck down the income tax imposed mid-19th century, and that it is the 16th Amendment that gave constitutional authority for it.

The Court, in Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co., redefined "direct" tax to exclude income gained from property, such as rent, and investments. It ruled that tax on income gained from work was Constitutional.

240 posted on 09/24/2006 10:34:38 AM PDT by lucysmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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