here - Fuerst Ittleman David & Joseph, PL

Case: 11-1612 Document: 003110561288 Page: 40 Date Filed: 06/13/2011
7602 was in error as the broad investigatory powers given to the IRS are not
without limits. Indeed, as this Court noted in another context, ―rarely if ever does
not mean never.‖ 12 This is one of the rare cases where there is institutional bad
faith which requires quashing of the subject summonses. 13
Accordingly, Mr. Gangi demonstrated through the aforementioned public
documents that the IRS is unconstitutionally, and in bad faith, singling out
taxpayers such as himself, and the enforcement of the subject summons was in fact
an abuse of the District Court‘s process. Consequently the District Court‘s
decision that the subject summonses should be enforced (and conversely the
denial, in part, of Mr. Gangi‘s Petition to Quash) was in error, and as such this
12
In re: United States, 273 F.3d 380, 385 (3d Cir. 2001) (addressing issuance of
writ of mandamus).
13 The District Court also appears to be implying that this is a political question that
should be addressed by the political branches of government. To the extent that
the District Court concluded that the IRS‘ never-ending audits of select USVI
taxpayers is a political question best left for Congress, the District Court erred.
Undoubtedly, "[t]he political question doctrine excludes from judicial review those
controversies which revolve around policy choices and value determinations
constitutionally committed for resolution to the halls of Congress or the confines of
the Executive Branch. . . . But under the Constitution, one of the judiciary's
characteristic roles is to interpret statutes, and [the courts] cannot shirk this
responsibility merely because [the] decision may have significant political
overtones." Japan Whaling Ass'n v. American Cetacean Society, 478 U.S. 221,
229-230, 106 S. Ct. 2860, 2866, 92 L. Ed. 2d 166 (1986). In the instant case we do
not have a pure political question; instead we have questions of institutional bad
faith and constitutional violations which require judicial intervention.
FUERST ITTLEMAN, PL
1001 BRICKELL BAY DRIVE, 32 ND FLOOR, MIAMI, FL 33131 • T: 305.350.5690 • F: 305.371.8989 • WWW.FUERSTLAW.COM
32 | P a g e