- 7 - than half of the dependent’s support and is unconstitutional. An irrebuttable presumption may be defined as a presumption “incapable of being overcome by proof of the most positive character.” Heiner v. Donnan, 285 U.S. 312, 324 (1932). Petitioner argues that section 152(e) denies him equal protection in disallowing the dependency exemption deduction for one of his children because Ms. Sirkis and he have an even number of children for whom he pays child support. With regard to Federal statutes, the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States embraces the principles of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. Johnson v. Robison, 415 U.S. 361, 364-365 n.4 (1974); Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618, 641-642 (1969). In Regan v. Taxation with Representation, 461 U.S. 540, 547 (1983), the Supreme Court noted: Generally, statutory classifications are valid if they bear a rational relation to a legitimate governmental purpose. Statutes are subjected to a higher level of scrutiny if they interfere with the exercise of a fundamental right, such as freedom of speech, or employ a suspect classification, such as race. Legislatures have especially broad latitude in creating classifications and distinctions in tax statutes. * * * [Citation omitted.] No fundamental right or suspect classification is involved here. Under the rational basis standard, a provision does not violate equal protection “if any state of facts rationally justifying it is demonstrated to or perceived by the courts.”Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011