- 6 -
he made in the trial memorandum he had already submitted.
Petitioner did not submit a new trial memorandum to the
Court.
Shortly thereafter, respondent filed a motion for
judgment on the pleadings in which respondent states that
the only issue raised by petitioner is:
whether the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitu-
tion is illegal because it violates the basic
body of the Constitution, tramples over the Bill
of Rights, and collects taxes upon wages rather
than income as specified in the amendment.
The memorandum filed by respondent in support of the motion
cites various cases in which the Courts of Appeals have
upheld the 16th Amendment to the Constitution and cases in
which courts have rejected the contention that wages are
not income. Respondent's memorandum also states as
follows:
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals, to which
circuit an appeal would lie in this case, has
also held that wages are income within the
meaning of the Sixteenth Amendment and considers
any arguments to the contrary to be frivolous
subjecting the party asserting them to possible
sanctions. United States v. Connor, 898 F.2d
942, 943-44 (3d Cir. 1990).
We calendared respondent's motion for a hearing at the
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, trial session.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011