The Extent of IRS Malice | American Center for Law and Justice
  Search  |  Login  |  Register

The Extent of IRS Malice

By David French1368543864000

Let me begin with your IRS question of the day — presented to a Tennessee conservative group:

List each past or present board member, officer, key employee and members of their families who:

a) Has served on the board of another organization.

b) Was, is or plans to be a candidate for public office.  Indicate the nature of each candidacy.

c) Has previously conducted similar activities for another entitty.

d) Has previously submitted an application for tax exempt status.

[Emphasis added]

Got that? Of course it’s irrelevant that key members of the MSM have spouses in the Obama administration, and the MSM presumes they can remain impartial, but the Internal Revenue Service must know if a tea-party leader’s daughter has filed an application for tax exemption for a local charity, and the IRS must know if his wife might want to run for city council. Unbelievable. And unconstitutional.

To be clear, these ridiculous questions were not just targeted at large, well-funded conservative groups but also at small, “mom and pop” style organizations that want to do things like rent space in the local public library or church fellowship hall to educate citizens about the Constitution and the history of our nation’s founding. We’re talking about groups that wanted to raise and spend just a few thousand dollars. But no group was too small to be spared the malice of the federal government.  

And these groups got hit with questions that were not only blatantly unconstitutional — like the question above — but with document requests so voluminous they required an entire legal team to respond. We did the work pro bono for our clients (we estimate we’ve spent 2,000 hours on the cases already), but those groups that didn’t have the benefit of pro bono counsel had to choose between abandoning their application, struggling to answer on their own (sometimes inadvertently providing information they didn’t have to provide), or spending money they didn’t have on competent counsel.

Barney Frank is reputed to have said “Government is simply the name we give to the things we choose to do together.” It’s looking more like government is the thing you inflict on your opponents.

This article is crossposted at National Review Online.

Latest in
Free Speech

Johnson Amendment and Churches’ Freedoms

By Michelle Terry1469544702518

Did you know there’s a little-known amendment that has been restricting the First Amendment rights of churches and faith-based organizations for more than 60 years? After it was mentioned during last week’s Republican National Convention, many people have been discussing this so-called Johnson...

read more

Brexit, Ordinary Voters, and the IRS

By Harry G. Hutchison1467122332057

Several days have passed since British voters upended the status quo favored by experts, elites, and money managers on both sides of the Atlantic. Although trillions of dollars of nominal wealth disappeared within a few hours of the vote, the enduring effects, both political and economic, of this...

read more

D.C. Court Upholds FCC's Net Neutrality

By ACLJ.org1466087532719

A split panel at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has upheld the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) 2015 net neutrality order reclassifying broadband and fixed and mobile wireless as a “telecommunications” service under Title II of the Communications Act ( United States Telecom...

read more

IRS Targeting Scandal: We Won't Allow It

By Jay Sekulow1465330627689

It’s a strategy the Obama administration has mastered – the 3-D strategy: Delay, Distract, and Deflect. I cited that strategy in a post last month when a federal judge in Texas labelled the Obama Justice Department “unethical” and “intentionally deceptive” – calling out the biased behavior of...

read more