- Term
- 2023-2024
Moore v. U.S.
This case was another opportunity for the Supreme Court to loosen regulations for wealthy donors and corporations. The Supreme Court considered here whether or not to eliminate certain taxes on foreign-earned income. An adverse ruling could have preemptively declared that progressive taxation of wealth or unrealized gains — like the wealth hoarded in the stock market — is unconstitutional. One of the lead attorneys arguing this case is David B. Rivkin Jr. — a lawyer and Wall Street Journal opinion writer who sat down for multiple sympathetic interviews with Justice Alito before and after reports accused Alito of ethics violations. Justice Alito refused to recuse himself from Moore v. U.S., despite his relationship with Rivkin.
On June 20, 2024, in a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court upheld the tax at issue in the case, though it left open the possibility of striking down a wealth tax at a later date. Justices Thomas and Gorsuch dissented, both writing that they believe taxes on unrealized gains are unconstitutional.
