The Supreme Court said on June 20 that former President Donald Trump’s one-time tax on “unrealized” foreign earnings was constitutional.
The case—Moore v. United States—involved a couple who invested money in an American-controlled company in India. They argued they shouldn’t have to pay the tax, known as the Mandatory Repatriation Act, on income that hadn’t been distributed or “realized” by them.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote the majority opinion, which was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the three liberal justices. Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Samuel Alito filed an opinion concurring in the end result but suggested the issues involved in the case were not as straightforward as Justice Kavanaugh’s opinion stated.
A dissent from Justice Clarence Thomas, and joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, said the Moores were “correct” when they argued that a tax on “incomes” as defined by the 16th Amendment cannot be imposed “without apportionment among the several states.”
The majority clarified that “nothing in this opinion should be read to authorize any hypothetical congressional effort to tax both an entity and its shareholders or partners on the same undistributed income realized by the entity.”
Three other decisions were released by the Supreme Court on June 20 involving questions about criminal prosecution. One of those—Diaz v. United States—questioned how expert witnesses could describe groups of people, which implicitly include the defendant, without violating federal rules of evidence.
More than a dozen other cases remain and the Supreme Court’s terms typically end in June. The Court could extend the term or continue adding days for potential opinion releases to the calendar. So far, the Supreme Court’s calendar shows opinions potentially being released on June 21 and June 26.
Many high-profile cases remain, including former President Donald Trump’s immunity appeal, challenges surrounding social media content moderation, and others that could upend the scope of administrative power as it is currently understood.
—Sam Dorman and Matthew Vadum
(Left) Former President Donald Trump arrives back at Trump Tower in New York on May 30, 2024. (Center) U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon. (Right) Special counsel Jack Smith speaks to the press at the Department of Justice building in Washington on Aug. 1, 2023. Timothy A. Clary/AFP via Getty Images; U.S. Southern District of Florida; Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images
MORE FOCUS ON SPECIAL COUNSEL JACK SMITH
The judge overseeing former President Donald Trump’s classified documents case will hold a fourth hearing on a motion to dismiss the case brought by special counsel Jack Smith tomorrow morning. This time, it deals with Smith’s appointment and whether it was lawful to begin with.
The defense argues that an officer like Smith has such sweeping powers that he requires appointment by presidential nomination and Senate confirmation. He was not, and therefore has no authority to prosecute, they argue.
The prosecution argues that department heads, like the attorney general, have authority to appoint inferior officers and that the special counsel fits the bill. Judges in the District of Columbia ruled as such when special counsel Robert Mueller’s appointment was challenged, but those decisions have no bearing in the Southern District of Florida.
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon has also allowed amicus parties to participate in the case, granting the three groups 30 minutes each.
Former government officials including two former attorney generals, and groups of legal scholars, have weighed in on the matter and urged swift resolution.
Whatever the judge’s decision, it is expected to be appealed. If she rules for the defense, it only heightens the chance of the appeal being accepted. Smith is prosecuting a second case against Trump in the District of Columbia and courts are not likely to want to create a situation where he has authority in one state and not another.
If that appeal reaches the Supreme Court, which is not guaranteed, constitutional law professor Steven Calabresi has said that six of the nine Supreme Court justices have opined on the separation of powers in a way that suggests they would side with the defense.
More arguments are scheduled for the coming Monday (June 24), including a request for what would be the fourth gag order on Trump.
BOOKMARKS
Senators are divided over a 60,000 minimum wage proposed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.). Some lawmakers agree that the higher wage will attract more teachers, but are dubious that it will result in better learning outcomes.
Homeland Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas pushed back against increased calls for mass deportation of illegal immigrants on June 18. Mr. Mayorkas said maintaining family unity, even if one spouse was undocumented, was a priority.
Jill Stein of the Green Party has filed an FEC complaint against CNN for excluding her from the debate. Ms. Stein only received about 1 percent of polling support compared to her opponents, while CNN requires 15 percent to participate.
The rape of a 12 year-old Jewish girl by three boys has ignited concerns about anti-Semitism in France. The tragedy of the assault is spilling over into the rhetoric of the upcoming election, where President Emmanuel Macron faces Marine Le Pen, whose party has been accused of anti-Semitism, but has recently taken strong pro-Israel stance.
Australian authorities blocked journalist Cheng Lei, formerly detained by the CCP, from reporting on a meeting between Opposition Leader Peter Dutton and Chinese Premier Li Qiang. Ms. Cheng had registered for the event a week before, but was told she could not enter after witnessing Chinese staff telling an Australian official “This is our turf; we can veto it.”
—Stacy Robinson
