The taxpayer, Harriet Frothingham, in Frothingham v. Mellon did not have standing in court because the burden was not on her personally. In order to have standing in Court, the party suing must be able to show injury and controversy. She had neither because her concern was the effects the statute would bring towards her property. The only way that Frothingham would have been eligible to sue was if the Congressional Act actually caused her property to be taken away to do an increase in taxation. Her case was not ripe. The decision from Frothingham v. Mellon was interpreted as a prohibition on taxpayer lawsuits and stood for forty-five years until Flast v. Cohen. The reason why the taxpayer in Flast v. Cohen did have standing is because he passed
There have been many, many court cases throughout the history of the United States. One important case that I believe to be important is the court case of Clinton v. New York. This case involves more than just President Bill Clinton, the City of New York; it involved Snake River Farmers’ as well. This case mostly resolves around the president’s power of the line item veto. In 1996 President Bill Clinton signed the Line Item Veto Act into law. This would allow the president to get rid of a part of a bill and not disapprove the entire bill. The first time that President Clinton used this power he used it to refine the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, he got rid of a part of the bill that waived the Federal Governments statutory right to get back or receive $2.6 billion in taxes that were levied by the City of New York. President Clinton also line item vetoed a section of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 this wouldn’t allow certain food processors and refiners to sell their stock to farmers to defer the recognition of capital gains. This is when the Snake River Farmers’ and City of New York went after Clinton for doing so this is where the case of Clinton v. The City of New York originated from. In this case there were constitutional issues that were raised, major arguments presented, and the final ruling from the Supreme Court.
John Adams, the previous Federalist president, lost the Election of 1800 to Thomas Jefferson, a Democratic-Republican. Before Jefferson took office, Adams decided to appoint as many Federalists into the Supreme court as he could, including William Marbury, all of whom needed to be commissioned in order to be officially sworn in. However, Jefferson took office before the commissions could be handed out, and he ordered his Secretary of State, James Madison, to not deliver the commissions. Marbury proceeded to ask Marshall for a writ of mandamus (found in Section 13 of the Judiciary Act), forcing Madison to issue the commissions. This dispute between Marbury and Madison sparks the famous case. The dilemma here is the differences in interpretation. Some viewed Section 13 as unconstitutional, as it added power to the Judicial Branch, disrupting checks and balances. Others saw that “Marbury had been duly appointed…[and] the writ of mandamus [was] to be an appropriate legal remedy for resolving Marbury’s dilemma”(Clinton 86). Marshall wanted to issue the...
The power to tax is key to a successful government. If a government is to act it needs the means to do so. The Articles withheld the power of taxation from Congress and gave it to the local governments. Congress could only appeal to the states for money. Unsurprisingly, the states did not respond with any of the requested money. This was a serious problem because the U.S. was in an incredible amount of debt as a result of the Revolutionary War. If money cannot be collected, how are debts to be paid? Some in Congress believed the problem could be solved by printing more money. However, this strategy only led to inflation, which weakened the economy furthe...
declined to employ Doolittle in the North Dakota position he sought. _____ Decl. ¶ _____.
Imagine living in a country where no citizen has a say in the government’s actions. Envision a nation where the ruler can tax people without permission and the common people are forced to obey without question. That was life in The Colonies before the year of 1776, when the Declaration of Independence was created. Great Britain passed laws whether it benefited the people or not. Before the Declaration of Independence was composed, a plethora of unnecessary taxes were approved. These taxes sent many colonists into debt. According to “The Declaration of Independence, 1776,” published on Office of the Historian, a famous tax called the Stamp Act was passed by Parliament. This tax forced colonists to purchase stamps for every paper product
...ll was politically motivated became obvious when the House voted to extend the act from its original one year proposed to the expiration of John Adams term, March 3, 1801. The victory of the Republicans, who ran on a platform of anti-sedition, in the election of 1800 showed that Americans were much more interested in personal freedom that what Federalist thought. It is understandable that in time of war some positions need to be taken to assure the countries well being; as seen in later wars when the Japanese were sent to camps in the west coast. But when these acts of concern start to eliminate certain right and freedoms or violate the constitution; they should be abolished. Thankfully, the American people have the Constitution and the Bill Of Rights to bring them back from the edge, and to force those positions in office governing for themselves into accountability.
Despite the downfall of the Federalist Party in the early nineteenth century, John Marshall continued to exert a strong Federalist influence on the government, which acted as a catalyst to ignite political controversy. In the McCullough vs. Maryland trial of 1819, Marshall deemed Maryland taxing the second bank of the United States as being unconstitutional, which gave even more power to the central government. (Doc D) Majority of the American population was against his ruling and refuted it because many people believed that having a strong central government was bad because if a bad decision was made, it would have affected the entire union, whereas if there was a strong state government, a bad decision would have just hurt the state. However, this was not the only time where the economy had failed in the early 1800’s. In 1816, John Randolph addressed congress and stated that it was unjust to tax the poo...
Special purpose entities, or SPE, were created by the chief financial officer Andy Fastow. The purpose of the partnerships with the newly established entities was the high debt of Enron and to record some profit on the sale of Enron assets to these companies. This kind of company needed to be independent from Enron. To establish independence and to comply with GAAP it had to meet two criteria. A. the existence of independent investor who controls at least 3 % of the entity assets. B. investors should act as the controlling shareholder and in making the entity business decisions. Chewco was one of those entities created by Fastow, they wanted it to be used to cover the loses of another entity called JEDI (which had a partnership with CALPERS). They needed this company so they didn’t have to report this loss on their balance sheet therefore they needed some independent investor to take over the 3% of the entity. The outside investors were aware of Enron business in this kind of entity so they wouldn’t participate in such entity. One Enron executive, Michael Kopper, informed Fastow that he is willing to take over the 3% needed to run the company. Kopper made a lot of profit off his new position and also managed to
As seen in Document C, Congress had so little money that it couldn’t afford to pay the army their bonuses. The army, of course, was discontented in this lack of action and thought they were being treated unjustly. The delay was so slow that the army did not think they were going to get paid. This, in itself, exhibits the great need for the national government to acquire the power to tax.
According to Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 78: “This independence of the judges is equally requisite to guard the Constitution and the rights of individuals from the effects of those ill humors, which the arts of designing men, or the influence of particular conjunctures, sometimes disseminate among the people themselves, and which, though they speedily give place to better information, and more deliberate reflection, have a tendency, in the meantime, to occasion dangerous innovations in the government, and serious oppressions of the minor party in the community(Hamilton, Page 8).” The influence of public opinion legislation may be affected by the social majority and violate the constitution, at the same time, this kind of undesirable tendency may cause unfair or biased act violations of human rights. So the judge independence is an important consideration to protect society from the tyranny of the majority of people of this kind of undesirable tendency of incidental. A judge determined not only can reduce the harm of such bill has passed, and can contain the legislature
...d by the court, there was no idea on how to create a standard, for the division between substantial and non-substantial commerce would be so small, they might as well be the same thing. When he talks about the court being proper, he talks about the decision to say that Filburn’s wheat growing activity had a substantial effect on commerce and that they agreed with congress’ judgement. But if congress were to be challenged on their decision on whether that was substantial enough to justify regulation, thus why the Wickard decision was so revolutionary, for even if congress was challenged on their decision, the courts would be in such a shamble on what to do. The case was such a new thing, for the court had the commerce power, and the court wouldn’t do anything against congress, because congress has the first and last say on whether or not what they say is commerce.
Constitutionally, the case at first appears to be a rather one-sided violation of the First Amendment as incorporated through the Fourteenth. The court, however, was of a different opinion: "...
Nowhere in The Constitution is this more evident than in Article 1, Section 9 which prevents direct taxation. This element allowed the Framers to protect their property interest and prevent the loss of wealth. This is noted by Wood “The national government was designed to make confiscation of wealth through taxation or currency inflation hard because of the effective veto of the Senate and presidency.”(Ch.2,
...ng to our benefit. Congress has several important and express responsibilities and while at times they may attempt to flex those powers in ways we don't agree with, or take the necessary and proper clause a little too liberally, we the people are always free to challenge them and utilize the powers given to us as free citizens to help decide how far those powers can really extend.
As we learn from the case study, the Lincoln Electric Company is the largest global manufacturer of machines for welding, which are used in all kinds of construction projects. This means that the company has a large global presence and many employees, so its culture affects thousands of its workers. Even though it is now 2014, the company still has a large market share and very satisfied employees, so clearly the culture leaves employees satisfied and motivates them to work hard for the company.