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.

    • @SCB
      link
      -11 year ago

      I mean I’m genuinely concerned he has mental health issues. That wasn’t some cheap insult

      • @20hzservers
        link
        4
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I think commenting on Lemmy all day is a mental health issue and I’m worried for you.

        • @SCB
          link
          -11 year ago

          That’s weird.

          • @20hzservers
            link
            51 year ago

            You read like a chat gpt bot told to be slightly antagonistic to every comment you read.

            • @Sparlock
              link
              English
              1
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              That’s weird /s

                • @Sparlock
                  link
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  I’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 you’d like to discuss, feel free to let me know, and I’ll do my best to assist you!

                  –ChatSCB

                  • @20hzservers
                    link
                    21 year ago

                    Lol I’m following him around and postin this under his comments. Thank you.