Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 5 · column 5 of 7 · from the scan, no model involved
of dollars in school improvements, including a planetarium, a 25-acre farm and model United Nations wired for simultaneous translations.
There are two ways to prohibit judicial taxation. One is by a constitutional amendment to bar Federal courts from ordering tax increases, while preserving all their historic powers to dispense justice. I have proposed an amendment to prohibit Federal courts from ordering tax increases by state or local governments (Senate Joint Resolution 295). Already, this proposal is cosponsored by 28 Senators, members of both political parties. Such an amendment would restore the constitutional order that existed from 1789 until 1990. The other option for Congress is to pass a statute to strip the courts of their authority to issue orders of this kind. My principal concern about a statutory remedy is that it cannot decide where the power of taxation is located. The most a statute could do, if upheld by the courts, would be to smother judicial taxation under a procedural blanket. A law might impede a power created by the Supreme Court’s reading of the Constitution, but it cannot abolish the power itself.
I believe the power of taxation by unelected, life-tenured judges should be abolished. Nonetheless, Jenkins must not stand; in the ab
97.2%