Create the future you want! Learn to make money online. Visit our website and start today! www.exclusivebizopps.com
A Tale of Two Supreme Courts
Tax Software By Doug Patton
United States Tax Court www.ustaxcourt.gov The U.S. related offenses. This site describes the process the court uses, presents FAQs about what's involved when a case goes to tax court, and gives contact information for court offices and judges. Yahoo! Taxes taxes.yahoo.com The giant search engine's Taxes page includes Tax Tips, a Tax Guide For Investors, Tax Education, and resources that can help users find an accountant or talk with others on the Yahoo! message board.
Software Tax (AXcess News) Omaha -
tax act 2003, tax calendar, federal tax guide, tax guide, tax act 2002, 2003 tax act, 2006 tax deadline calendar, tax resources, 2006 tax guide, income tax news, tax news, tax return guides, 2006 tax preparer's guide, calendar of tax refunds, tax preparer resources, tax rate guide, home business tax resources, small business tax resources, tax act 2003, tax evasion news 2006, tax guides, 2006 federal tax act, 2006 tax guide 1040, 2006 us master tax guide, federal tax calendar
Every Landlord Tax Deduction "Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel."
Jesus speaking to the Pharisees
Matthew 23:24
However, neither the district nor the appeal courts agreed with this logic. Both courts upheld Florida's right to ban gay adoptions. What does it mean when the Supreme Court declines a case There are lots of reasons why the Supreme Court selects or declines any given case. Over 8, 000 petitions flood the court each term. Just the sheer number of petitions forces the court to be highly selective.
Tax Help This scripture came to mind last week as the Chicken Littles of the Left rung their hands over a recent vote in Congress that might jeopardize their precious right to burn the American flag, yet had no problem with a pair of truly dangerous decisions from state and federal courts. I refer to a ruling by the Iowa Supreme Court and another by a sharply divided (5-4) U.S. Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court however has not been as protective of the press. In fact, the Court has largely limited the press over the course of the last thirty five years. Back in 1972, the Supreme Court ruled that a journalist had no right to refuse testimony where he or she had witnessed criminal activity. The Court also since held that a journalist who fails to comply with a subpoena can be held in contempt of court and fined or even sent to jail.
Help Tax The Iowa court declined to hear a challenge to a lesbian "divorce" granted in November 2003 by District Judge Jeffrey Neary of Sioux City. The suit was brought by Iowa Congressman Steve King, Rev. Matthew Wentz, pastor of Church of Christ of Le Mars, and several members of the Iowa Legislature (all of them Republicans).
Read the family finance guide from Moneynet.co.uk, providing information on family finance issues such as child trust funds (CTF's) and child tax credits.
Ernst Ernst Guide Guide Tax King, who fought for Iowa's Defense of Marriage Act when he was in the Iowa State Senate, issued a statement after the ruling.
Tax Return "As a legislator I was involved with the Iowa law that says same-sex marriages from other states are not valid in Iowa," he said. "If I and the other legislators who joined me to rein in the runaway judiciary did not have standing to defend the law in court, then who would?"
Return Tax Who, indeed? In refusing to hear this case, Iowa's high court has ruled that state and federal legislators elected to represent the American people, along with a Christian minister of the Gospel charged with representing the moral authority of God, have no right to challenge the authority of judges on an issue as critical to the foundation of a free society as the sanctity of marriage. What arrogance! If ever we were presented with evidence that our judiciary has become an unaccountable oligarchy, this is it.
Guide Guide Master Master Tax But wait; it gets worse. The same week the Iowa court was defending the right of one of its own to grant a divorce to people who are not legally married, the United States Supreme Court ruled that local governments can use their right of eminent domain to "condemn" private property and hand it over to private developers "for the public good." (Read: "more property taxes.")
Tax Preparation The case in question was Kelo vs. New London, wherein a group of Connecticut homeowners sued their local city government for trying to condemn their homes and seize their private property to make way for the development of upscale homes and an office park. Not a highway. Not a bridge. Not a water treatment plant. Not a courthouse. Upscale homes and an office park.
Preparation Tax Sounds like a clear case of abuse of eminent domain, doesn't it? Not according to the liberal majority on the U.S. Supreme Court. Of course, the developers have to pay the land owners (who have no say in the matter) "fair market value," but that figure is set by those seizing the property.
Employer Tax Guide The usual suspects (Steven Breyer, David Souter, John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg) voted as they might be expected to: for the right of the city to seize property in order to use it to raise greater tax revenues. Joining them in this outrage was the increasingly predicable Anthony Kennedy.
Tax Services Adamant in their dissent were the court's three consistent conservatives (Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Chief Justice William Renquist) and Sandra Day O'Connor, who cast a vote based on the Constitution for once.
Services Tax Some of the New London homes have been in the same families for more than 100 years. They are well maintained. No matter. Private developers wanted the property, and the New London city government saw dollar signs in the form of increased property taxes, so the United States Supreme Court sanctioned this travesty.
Master Tax Guide One can only wonder the outcome when a cash-strapped municipality begins salivating for a prime piece of church property.
Tax Attorney While gagging on gnats like a proposed anti-flag burning amendment, liberals swallow these judicial camels without blinking an eye. It is not hard to envision the kind of society they want to create.
Share this:
More about:
- Books A Million Online Bookstore
- eBay Patent Case Against MercExchange Put on Hold by U.S. Court of Appeals
- US: Ex-Intel Worker's Case Goes to High Court
- Release Of Energy Records Ordered
- USA: Court Throws Out Exxon Valdez Fine
- US: Justices Reject Campaign Limits in Vermont Case
- Court Overturns Jury Award In '89 Exxon Valdez Spill
- Iran: Rights Groups Shine Spotlight On Capital Punishment In Iran




