Legal Digest -Court blocks 'millionaire tax' question from state ballot
Law News
Today's Legal News Bookmark This Website
Court blocks 'millionaire tax' question from state ballot
Law News | 2018/06/16 10:52
Massachusetts' highest court on Monday struck down a proposed "millionaire tax" ballot question, blocking it from going before state voters in November and ending advocates' hopes for generating some $2 billion in additional revenue for education and transportation.

The Supreme Judicial Court, in a 5-2 ruling, said the initiative petition should not have been certified by Democratic Attorney General Maura Healey because it violated the "relatedness" clause of the state constitution that prohibits ballot questions from mingling unrelated subjects — in this case, taxing and spending.

The proposed constitutional amendment — referred to by its proponents as the "Fair Share Amendment," would have imposed a surtax of 4 percent on any portion of an individual's annual income that exceeds $1 million. The measure called for revenues from the tax to be earmarked for transportation and education.

Writing for the majority, Associate Justice Frank Gaziano said a voter who supported the surtax but opposed earmarking the funds for a specific purpose would be left "in the untenable position of choosing which issue to support and which must be disregarded."

The justices offered hypothetical examples of voters who might support spending on one priority but not the other, such as a subway commuter with no school-age children.

The measure had been poised to reach voters in November after receiving sufficient support from the Legislature in successive two-year sessions. But several business groups, including the Massachusetts High Technology Council and Associated Industries of Massachusetts, sued to block it.

The court's ruling was a devastating blow for Raise Up Massachusetts, a coalition of labor unions, community and religious organizations that collected more than 150,000 signatures in support of the millionaire tax.


[PREV] [1] ..[707][708][709][710][711][712][713][714][715].. [2543] [NEXT]
All
Legal News Digest
Law Firm News
Legal Career News
Headline Legal News
Lawyer Blog Updates
Legal Business
Law News
Court Press News
Legal Interview
Legal World News
Press Release
Legal Opinions
Law Firm Marketing
Legal & Political
Law School News
TikTok content creators sue the US g..
Abortion consumes US politics, court..
Trump faces prospect of additional s..
Retrial of Harvey Weinstein unlikely..
Starbucks appears likely to win Supr..
Supreme Court will weigh banning hom..
Court makes it easier to sue for job..
Judge in Trump case orders media not..
Top Europe rights court condemns Swi..
Elon Musk will be investigated over ..
Retired Supreme Court Justice Anthon..
The Man Charged in an Illinois Attac..
UN court orders Israel to open more ..
Former Georgia insurance commissione..
Alabama woman who faked kidnapping p..
A Supreme Court ruling in a social m..
Court upholds mandatory prison terms..
Trump wants N.Y. hush money trial to..
Supreme Court restores Trump to ball..
Supreme Court restores Trump to ball..


   Lawyer & Law Firm Links
Oregon DUI Law Attorney
Eugene DUI Lawyer. Criminal Defense Law
www.mjmlawoffice.com
San Francisco Trademark Lawyer
San Francisco Copyright Lawyer
www.onulawfirm.com
New York Adoption Lawyers
New York Foster Care Lawyers
Adoption Pre-Certification
www.lawrsm.com
 
 
© Legal News Digest. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer: The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Legal News Media as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. Blog postings and hosted comments are available for general educational purposes only and should not be used to assess a specific legal situation. | Criminal Defense Attorney Web Design by Law Promo