Opinion

Jefferson County v. Acker

  • 61 F.3d 848
  • 1995 WL 461623
Court
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Filed
Aug 21, 1995
Status
Published
Author
Tjoflat
On the bench
Tjoflat, Birch, Henderson
Cited by
10 cases
Authority
More cited than 23.8%

The opinion

TJOFLAT, Chief Judge,

dissenting:

Irespectfully dissent.

The main issue to be decided in this case “is whether the Jefferson County tax is ‘imposed directly on’ the federal government.” Jefferson County v. Acker, 850 F.Supp. 1536, 1541 (N.D.Ala.1994). I agree with the district court’s reasoning and its conclusion that “the Jefferson County occupational tax is imposed directly upon a governmental function — the performance in the federal courthouse in Birmingham, Alabama of federal judicial functions. Those functions are the actual event taxed (the legal incidence of the tax).” Id. at 1543 .

This is not a question of the taxation of an independent contractor or agency official (parties in other cases challenging taxes). See, e.g., James v. Dravo Contracting Co., 302 U.S. 134 , 58 S.Ct. 208 , 82 L.Ed. 155 (1937). The federal judiciary is surely “so assimilated by the Government as to become one of its constituent parts.” Ante at 3160 n. II (quoting cases). “Here, the tax is on the privilege of performing the federal judicial function itself — one of the three grand (Legislative; Executive; Judicial) federal functions.” Acker, 850 F.Supp. at 1542 . Article III judges are not independent contractors. The judiciary is not merely a building or an administrative organizational body — it is “an arm of the Government.” Ante at 3160 (quoting cases). The individual judges who administer justice are the judicial branch of government. Taxation (based on income or an alternative measure) of the performance of federal judges is, therefore, taxation of the federal government.

Additionally, I would find for the judges on the Compensation Clause claim because the Jefferson County occupational tax is a “direct, discriminatory assault on judicial independence.” Ante at 3163 (quoting cases). The court’s opinion does not address the onerous recordkeeping and reporting requirements imposed by Ordinance 1120. The ordinance requires every judge to divide his or her performance 1 within Jefferson County from those functions performed outside the county and to allocate compensation earned only within Jefferson County for tax assessment. Thirty-one counties comprise the Northern District of Alabama. 28 U.S.C. § 81 (a). 2 Although Judge Acker and Judge Clemon maintain chambers in Jefferson County, they routinely perform judicial functions in other counties 3 and their decisions *858 affect citizens of other counties. Ordinance 1120 creates an administrative nightmare that “impede[s] the operation of the federal judiciary.” Ante at 3164.

Because this tax is a direct assault on the administration of justice, I dissent.

. The Northern District of Alabama encompasses Jefferson County along with the counties of Colbert, Franklin, Lauderdale, Cullman, Jackson, Lawrence, Limestone, Madison, Morgan, Blount, Shelby, Calhoun, Clay, Cleburne, Talladega, Bibb, Greene, Pickens, Sumter, Tuscaloosa, Cherokee, De Kalb, Etowah, Marshall, Saint Clair, Fayette, Lamar, Marion, Walker, and Winston.

. Congress has mandated that, in addition to Birmingham, court be held at Florence, Huntsville, Decatur, Anniston, Tuscaloosa, Gadsden, and Jasper. 28 U.S.C. § 81 (a).

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.