{"title":"法院之友克里斯汀·e·希克曼支持上诉人,CIC服务有限责任公司诉美国国税局等人案摘要,第19-930号(美国最高法院)","authors":"Kristin E. Hickman","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3658611","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This amicus brief was filed before the United States Supreme Court in CIC Services, LLC v. Internal Revenue Service, No. 19-930, supporting the petitioners on the merits. The issue in the case is whether the Anti-Injunction Act, 26 U.S.C. s. 7421(a), precludes pre-enforcement judicial review of Administrative Procedure Act challenges against Treasury and IRS rules and regulations -- specifically in this case, IRS Notice 2016-66. Building on previous scholarship, the brief argues that statutory text, history, and purpose support a narrow interpretation of the Anti-Injunction Act that harmonizes with the Administrative Procedure Act and allows pre-enforcement judicial review.","PeriodicalId":330166,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Public Law - Tax eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Brief of Amicus Curiae Kristin E. Hickman In Support of Petitioners, CIC Services, LLC v. Internal Revenue Service, et al., No. 19-930 (U.S. Supreme Court)\",\"authors\":\"Kristin E. Hickman\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3658611\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This amicus brief was filed before the United States Supreme Court in CIC Services, LLC v. Internal Revenue Service, No. 19-930, supporting the petitioners on the merits. The issue in the case is whether the Anti-Injunction Act, 26 U.S.C. s. 7421(a), precludes pre-enforcement judicial review of Administrative Procedure Act challenges against Treasury and IRS rules and regulations -- specifically in this case, IRS Notice 2016-66. Building on previous scholarship, the brief argues that statutory text, history, and purpose support a narrow interpretation of the Anti-Injunction Act that harmonizes with the Administrative Procedure Act and allows pre-enforcement judicial review.\",\"PeriodicalId\":330166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law & Society: Public Law - Tax eJournal\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law & Society: Public Law - Tax eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3658611\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Society: Public Law - Tax eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3658611","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本“法庭之友摘要”已提交美国最高法院,在CIC服务有限责任公司诉美国国税局案(第19-930号)中支持上诉人的案情。本案的问题在于,《反禁令法》(26 U.S.C. s. 7421(a))是否排除了对《行政程序法》针对财政部和国税局规章制度的挑战的执行前司法审查——特别是在本案中,国税局通知2016-66。摘要在以往学术研究的基础上,认为法定文本、历史和目的支持对《反禁令法》的狭义解释,使之与《行政程序法》相协调,并允许执行前司法审查。
Brief of Amicus Curiae Kristin E. Hickman In Support of Petitioners, CIC Services, LLC v. Internal Revenue Service, et al., No. 19-930 (U.S. Supreme Court)
This amicus brief was filed before the United States Supreme Court in CIC Services, LLC v. Internal Revenue Service, No. 19-930, supporting the petitioners on the merits. The issue in the case is whether the Anti-Injunction Act, 26 U.S.C. s. 7421(a), precludes pre-enforcement judicial review of Administrative Procedure Act challenges against Treasury and IRS rules and regulations -- specifically in this case, IRS Notice 2016-66. Building on previous scholarship, the brief argues that statutory text, history, and purpose support a narrow interpretation of the Anti-Injunction Act that harmonizes with the Administrative Procedure Act and allows pre-enforcement judicial review.