Jesus and the Anti-Injunction Act

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Biblical scholars have debated the story of the resurrection for millennia. Some read the story literally, others with greater consideration to the purpose the story-writers had in reciting the story. In the recent case of National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius. the high priests of the law declared that section 7421 (the Anti-Injunction Act (AIA)) did not bar federal courts from hearing a challenge to what Congress called a penalty, codified in section 5000A. The penalty will be imposed on taxpayers who fail to obtain requisite health insurance starting in 2014. What is striking to me is the Supreme Court’s literalist approach. The nub of its reasoning is that the AIA only applies to suits involving a tax, and Congress called section 5000A a penalty. Although I understand the desire of all parties — and apparently all the Supreme Court justices — to get to the fun constitutional stuff, the myopic focus on the word ‘‘tax’’ obscures the law. Although the AIA’s purpo
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)13
JournalTax Analysts
StatePublished - Sep 10 2012

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Jesus and the Anti-Injunction Act'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this