Justine is doing Pollock v. Farmers Loan
1. Justine Collins
2. Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company, 157 U.S. 429
3. It was an important United States Supreme Court case in which the court ruled that a particular type of income tax—specifically, a tax on income derived from property—was a direct tax under the United States Constitution, and consequently had to be levied in proportion to each state's population.
4. It removed the requirement that taxes on incomes be apportioned by population.
5. Taxes should all be equal and fair to everyone.

victoria bustamante is doing Devenpeck v. Alford (11/8/04)

1.Austin Giardullo
2. Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad(1916)
3. Brushaber had stocks in Union Pacific Railroad the 16th amend ment was recently passed and Brushaber had a lawsuit against the railroad because he didn't want to have to pay the tax with the railroad and lose money. Also he said that before the 16th amendment Congress didn't have the power to tax railroads.
4. The court ruled that Congress was allowed to lay or collect revenue from any source or buisness.
5.This case showed that the Revenue act of 1913 was un constitutional. Also the Sixteenth Amendment was upheld that it removes the requirement that income taxes be apportioned among the states according to population.


1. Ryan Odom
2. Graves v. New york
3. He didn't agree with the income taxes, and said they were incorect. The taxes took a big chunk of money out of his pay check, and out of his employs pay checks. He had to take out several mortgage loans
4. The court repared the improper taxes.
5.His bussnes was suffering because of the taxes. He was also suffering Finically because of the taxes.

1. Stephen Epstein
2. Flint v. Stone Tracy Co. (1911)
3. This case was challenged because it was challenging the income tax on corporations.
4. The decision was that there was no income tax anymore.
5. This affects all the business because they don't have to pay income tax.

1.Jack Cubberly
2.griswald v. connecticut
3.Should people be allowed access to drugs or devices designed to stop contraception, and thus be able to engage in sex without having to worry as much about pregnancy?
4.Connecticut prohibited the use of drugs or instruments to prevent conception.
5.the impacked stopped people frome useing drugs
GO GIANTS!
Should people be aloud to take a drug so that two people can have in sexual intecource without the worry of getting prenant. Thats whats is being argued in the case Griswald v. Connecticut. The Supreme Court overturned Griswold's conviction and invalidated the Connecticut law. Even thoe the Bill of Rights does not explicitly mention "privacy", Justice William O. Douglas (writing for the majority) ruled that the right was to be found in the "penumbras" and "emanations" of other constitutional protections. Justice Arthur Goldberg wrote a concurring opinion in which he used the Ninth Amendment to defend the Supreme Court's ruling. Justice John Marshall Harlan II wrote a concurring opinion in which he argued that privacy is protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Justice Byron White also wrote a concurrence based on the due process clause.
1 Frank
2 Murphy case
3 The case involved a woman working for the New York Air National Guard. When she blew the whistle on environmental problems on an airbase, she stated that her boss retaliated by “blacklisting” her and giving bad references to potential bosses. She filed a complaint with the Department of Labor, who referred the case to an administrative law judge, who ultimately ended up rewarding her $70,000 in compensatory damages for emotional distress. She initially paid tax on the $70,000 but later filed for a refund. She had two main reasons in her refund lawsuit: first, that the internal revenue code excluded the $70,000 from gross income; second, that the Sixteenth Amendment precluded the taxation of the $70,000 as income.
4 The judge forced extra money because of emotional disstress.
5 Now you can sew someone extra money for emotional distress.