Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
John Henry Ryskamp v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 19-72626 · judgment August 13, 2020
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Questions presented
Introductory Statement In Janus v. AFSCME, 138 S. Ct. 2448 (2018), Justice Kagan correctly noted in her dissent that the “fee” is a tax on free speech. Janus is a tax case, because the “fee” is a tax according to criteria established by this Court, as Justice Kagan well understood. Applying Janus, the issue in this case is whether the U.S. tax system is, for Constitutional purposes, identical to the tax system described by this Court in Janus. If it is, then it contains the same prohibited individually enforceable protected speech component which caused this Court to strike down the Janus “fee.” In which case, three questions arise for this Court: The Questions
-
Under Janus v. AFSCME, does the U.S. tax system violate U.S. Const, amend I because it contains a prohibited individually enforceable protected speech component?
-
Under Janus v. AFSCME, does the U.S. tax system violate Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 because it legislates for the general welfare?
-
Under Janus v. AFSCME, does taxation enjoy a higher level of scrutiny than minimum scrutiny?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
John Ryskamp
For respondent
Brian H. Fletcher
Acting Solicitor General
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Feb 22 2021Petition DENIED.
- Jan 27 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/19/2021.
- Jan 22 2021Waiver of right of respondent Commissioner of Internal Revenue to respond filed.
- Jan 06 2021Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 16, 2021)