- 27 -                                                  
            statute cited in the amended petitions, 50 U.S.C. section 1520                             
            (1982), has long since been repealed.  When it was effective, the                          
            statute related to the testing of chemical and biological agents                           
            on humans.  Clearly such a statute is not relevant to our                                  
            redetermination of any deficiency in petitioners’ Federal income                           
            taxes.                                                                                     
                  In the amended petitions, petitioners state that                                     
            “[petitioners bring] only an issue of law before the court.”  In                           
            petitioners’ responses (to the motions for judgment on the                                 
            pleadings), petitioners claim that that no longer is the case.                             
            Nevertheless, petitioners have not moved to amend the amended                              
            petitions to aver any facts in support of their assignments of                             
            error.  See Rules 34(b), 41(a).  Indeed, in petitioners’                                   
            responses to the motions, petitioners’ claim:  “[t]here is no                              
            evidence” (1) “to suggest that there is a bona fide political                              
            relationship between the petitioners and the ‘UNITED STATES’ and                           
            the ‘STATE OF CALIFORNIA’” and (2) “that the petitioners are                               
            subject to the written will of individuals called ‘CONGRESSMEN’”.                          
            Those claims do not raise any factual issue relevant to our                                
            redetermination of the deficiencies determined by respondent.                              
            Those are frivolous claims of no merit.  Petitioners have raised                           
            no factual issues for decision by us.                                                      
                  None of the petitions or amended petitions assign any error                          
            that we consider justiciable:  Petitioners rely on meritless tax-                          
Page:  Previous   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   NextLast modified: May 25, 2011