FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 1, 2021
|
|
Lisa Gates, Vice President of Communications, (614) 224-3255
|
|
|
The Buckeye Institute Celebrates Court Wins Protecting First Amendment Rights & Taxpayers
Columbus, OH – The
Buckeye Institute’s position prevailed in two significant court cases,
one that protects the privacy and First Amendment rights of individuals
who donate to charities and other nonprofit organizations, and another
that protects taxpayers and the principle of federalism.
In Ohio v. Yellen,
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio blocked the
Biden Administration’s tax mandate that prohibited states accepting
federal COVID relief funds from enacting tax cuts. The decision agrees
with The Buckeye Institute’s two briefs (here and here)
in the case which argue that the tax mandate is fundamentally unclear
and therefore unenforceable and that the treasury secretary cannot fix
Congress’s error through regulatory action. The Buckeye Institute’s
counsel in this litigation provided the following comments:
“Today’s
decision is a victory for federalism and democratic accountability. The
idea that the federal government could block states from cutting taxes
was always a stretch. The tax mandate is even more problematic, because
of its fundamental vagueness on what exactly states are prohibited from
doing, which leaves questions of core state power to the whim of federal
officials,” said Robert Alt, president and chief executive officer of The Buckeye Institute.
“The Buckeye Institute has argued as much from day one, and Judge
Cole’s scholarly decision vindicates Buckeye’s approach, Ohio’s wisdom
in bringing this challenge, and the right of Ohioans to set their own
tax policy free of federal interference.”
“If
Congress is going to leverage spending to direct state policy, it has
to make the terms of the deal crystal clear. The tax mandate is anything
but clear, and that’s what dooms it,” said Andrew M. Grossman, partner
at Baker & Hostetler LLP. “Today’s decision blocking the tax mandate
is a straightforward application of the Supreme Court’s precedent, and
it should serve as a model for the other courts considering similar
challenges.”
In Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta and Thomas More Society v. Bonta, the U.S. Supreme Court—as The Buckeye Institute argued it should in its amicus brief—stuck
down California’s unlawful collection of the private information of
individuals who donate to charities and other nonprofit organizations.
“The
Buckeye Institute has fiercely opposed the forced disclosure of
people’s names, addresses, and the charities they support. Forcing
Americans to disclose their social and political affiliations is clearly
unconstitutional, and the government should not be warehousing private
information about the causes and organizations Americans support.” said
Robert Alt, president and chief executive officer of The Buckeye Institute.
“Today’s ruling will prohibit the government from requiring nonprofits
to disclose donors’ personal information that, if disclosed, could
subject them to threats and harassment.”
# # #
|
|
Founded in 1989, The Buckeye Institute is an independent research and educational institution – a think tank – whose mission is to advance free-market public policy in the states.
The
Buckeye Institute is a non-partisan, non-profit, and tax-exempt
organization, as defined by section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue
code. As such, it relies on support from individuals, corporations, and
foundations that share a commitment to individual liberty, free
enterprise, personal responsibility, and limited government. The Buckeye
Institute does not seek or accept government funding.
|
|
|
|
Support The Buckeye Institute by setting us as your designated charity through AmazonSmile. Every time you make a purchase, Amazon will donate 0.5% of the total to The Buckeye Institute at no extra cost to you!
AmazonSmile and the AmazonSmile logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment