I have a case before the Supreme Court, which if they hear it, will end the income tax. Here is a blurb about it. Irwin Schiff A CASE NOW PENDING BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT, WILL END THE INCOME TAX, IF THE SUPREME COURT ELECTS TO HEAR IT. THE CASE IS: ROBERT A. BROWN, et al., vs. UNITED STATES of AMERICA DOCKET NUMBER 99-2066 YOU CAN READ ALL ABOUT THIS CASE (INCLUDING THE TWO LOWER COURT DECISIONS THAT LED UP TO THE SUPREME COURT APPEAL) BY LOGGING ON TO http://www.paynoincometax.com/taxcase.htm

LINK

This case involves a lawsuit brought by the Browns to get back the $5,000 in withholding taxes they paid in 1996. Unknown to the American public, withholding taxes are not income taxes. They represent a different type of tax altogether: they represent a "wage tax." A direct tax on wages would be unconstitutional, if the law didnt also allow you to get it all back, if you request a refund in the manner done by the Browns. When the IRS refused to refund the Browns the "withholding taxes" as required by law, they sued the Federal government in District Court. When the District Court refused to grant the Browns the refund required by law, they appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Both courts denied the Browns the refund required by law, because they knew that if they granted it, other American wage earners would find out about it, and want their "withholding taxes" back to. That would mean "bye-bye" withholding taxes, "bye bye" income taxes, and "bye-bye" IRS. You can read those two lower court decisions and an analysis of them and this case, by logging on to http://www.paynoincometax.com/taxcase.htm

LINK

The point is, the Supreme Court will not want to hear this case, since there is no way they can hear it and deny the Browns their refund that 30 statutes (many of them identified on the Web site) say they are entitled to. Since the Supreme Court hears only a small percentage of the cases presented to it, we want to deluge the Court with letters requesting that they hear this case. Given the power of the Internet we should be able to generate hundreds of thousands of letters. Your letter can be short, such as: Dear Justices: This is to urge you to hear the case of Brown, vs. U. S., Docket No. 99-2066. Since this case represents the wage tax (imposed in Code Section 3402(a)) it effects all working Americans, and since no court has ever addressed the legality of this tax, it is incumbent upon the Supreme Court to do so now. Constitutionally yours, Send your letter to: The Supreme Court, 1 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20543 For more information on this case, or to secure copies of the Writ and accompanying Appendix call FREEDOM BOOKS AT 1-800-829-6666 or go to our Web site, http://www.paynoincometax.com/taxcase.htm

LINK

-- ben (bennyben@notmail.com), October 02, 2000

Answers

HORSE SHIT.

If there is a legal issue for the Supreme Court to decide, they will hear the case. The argument that they would not hear the case... because it would end the income tax.... is a circle jerk from ignorant bs artists and paranoids.

You could sent the Court 10 million letters and 100 million e-mails and if there is not a legal issue, the case will not be heard. If you doubt that remember the story of Miranda who hand wrote ONE LETTER IN PENCIL to the Court and had his case reviewed and the decision overturned.

The Supreme Court judges good and bad laws and good and bad cases. It is typical of extremists that when the Supreme Court rules in their favor, they don't question the Court's ability or impartiality. When the case goes against the extreme views, they blame the Court.

-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), October 02, 2000.

The U.S. Supreme Court announced on September 20th that its docket is now available without charge on its Web site. The docket includes information about the status of all cases, pending and decided, on the Supreme Court calendar for this term and last term. Information on the docket is updated on the day after an entry is made on the docket. The Supreme Court docket can be accessed at

.

-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), October 02, 2000.

Chuck, the fact that you think it's horseshit gives it more credibility.

-- CPR,clueless wonder (Anybodyseenmy2hundr@dthous.and?), October 02, 2000.

Nope, on this one CPR is correct. You shouldn't just flame everything he says just because of his past history. People reform.

And, as an attorney, I can guarantee that the original post is just the standard "tax nut" BS. After all, appeal to the Supreme Court is not "of right."

-- E.H. Porter (Just Wondering@About.it), October 02, 2000.

Now it's even more credible.

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), October 02, 2000.

Oh, KoFE, you lovable old tax nut you . . . the internet would just not be the same without you.

-- E.H. Porter (Just Wondering@About.it), October 02, 2000.

And what would this country be, without socialist like you. Porter?

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), October 02, 2000.