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.

  • ILikeBoobies
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Staging an emergency isn’t that hard, and the courts are on their side

    • spaceghoti@lemmy.oneOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s why they’re planning it. There’s plenty of law and precedent against it, but they know all they need is the thinnest veneer of an excuse to get their partisan justices to rule in their favor.