- 12 -
Nationalist Movement was an organization whose activities are
very similar to the activities of petitioner. Barrett served as
the taxpayer’s chairman, treasurer, and attorney in that case.
This Court held that Rev. Proc. 86-43, supra, is not overbroad
and does not violate the 1st and 14th Amendments to the
Constitution. See id. at 583-589.
Citing the 5th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution,
petitioner argues that respondent has treated it differently from
other organizations similarly situated, thereby violating its due
process and equal protection rights. The 14th Amendment provides
that no State shall deny to any person the equal protection of
the laws. The Fifth Amendment, as applicable to the Federal
Government, has no equal protection clause, but its due process
guarantees incorporate similar principles. See Regan v. Taxation
with Representation, 461 U.S. 540, 542 n.2 (1983); Bolling v.
Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497, 499 (1954).
Petitioner moved to compel discovery relating to these
constitutional arguments after the parties had filed the
administrative record with the Court. Only in very unusual
circumstances and upon good cause shown will the Court permit
either party to supplement the administrative record. See Rule
217(a); Nationalist Movement v. Commissioner, 37 F.3d 216,
218-219 (5th Cir. 1994), affg. T.C. Memo. 1992-698. In response
to petitioner’s motion, this Court concluded that good cause had
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011