October Term 2006 · Docket 06-376
Which court hears tax interest abatement claims?
the sides that brought the case seek district court review. The government demands exclusive Tax Court jurisdiction.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Redding argued the Federal Circuit was wrong.
He claimed district court jurisdiction existed before new laws.
Mr. Marcus argued the Tax Court has exclusive power.
He cited the structure of the interest abatement statute.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 15-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 3-7 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 3-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 5-45 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 5-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 47-11 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 47-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 37-43 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 37-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 31-35 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 31-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 19-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 19-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 35-45 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 35-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 49-5 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 49-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 9-13 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 9-13
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The dispute centers on statutory interpretation. the sides that brought the case argue district courts retain jurisdiction. The government claims the Tax Court holds exclusive power.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 5-45 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 5-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-15
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 23, 2007.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
What each side wants
the sides that brought the case want district court access for interest claims.
The government wants exclusive Tax Court jurisdiction.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 5-45 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 5-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-15
What each side says
the sides that brought the case argue prior jurisdiction survived new statutes.
The government cites sovereign immunity principles.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 5-45 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 5-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-15
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Roberts asked about specific statutory citations.
Justice Ginsburg questioned the fairness of limited access.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 15-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 3-7 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 3-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 47-11 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 47-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 37-43 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 37-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 31-35 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 31-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 19-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 19-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 35-45 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 35-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 49-5 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 49-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 9-13 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 9-13
Why it matters
Taxpayers face different forums for interest disputes. Wealthier taxpayers may access district courts. This creates unequal legal pathways for similar claims.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 5-45 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 5-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-15
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 15-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 3-7 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 3-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 47-11 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 47-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 37-43 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 37-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 31-35 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 31-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 19-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 19-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 35-45 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 35-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 49-5 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 49-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 9-13 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 9-13
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 5-45 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 5-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 5-45 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 5-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-15
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.