The plaintiffsā€™ arguments in Moore v. United States have little basis in law ā€” 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 nationā€™s highest Court, so there is some risk that a majority of the justices will accept the plaintiffsā€™ dubious legal arguments. And if they do so, they could do considerable damage to the governmentā€™s ability to fund itself.

      • Sparlock@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        Ā·
        1 year ago

        Iā€™m here to help and provide information or assistance on a wide range of topics. If something seems weird or if you have a specific question or topic youā€™d like to discuss, feel free to let me know, and Iā€™ll do my best to assist you!

        ā€“ChatSCB