Forgot to add an aside to AD’s comments/defense about defending people of questionable appeal - I did reject veterinary medical service to the head of Aryan Nations, Rev. (?) Butler, and his dog while I served on the faculty of a university. Students were shocked, but I told him his views are an anathema to the ideals of this country. He shook my hands and thanked me anyway and I walked out of the exam room. Ironically, the school was celebrating MLK day soon thereafter. I never understood why lawyers and doctors have to provide their services to horrific individuals.
Dr Dershowitz, you know they can. Tax exemption doesn't come lightly, and the requirements for tax exemption is extensive.
What follows is an AICPT response:
To qualify for a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status in the United States, an organization must meet several requirements as stipulated by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Firstly, the organization must be organized and operated exclusively for one or more exempt purposes, such as charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, or the prevention of cruelty to children or animals. Additionally, it must not be operated for the benefit of any private individual or shareholder.
Furthermore, the organization must not engage in substantial lobbying activities or participate in any political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office. It should also refrain from conducting any activities that do not further its exempt purposes. The organization must ensure that its net earnings do not inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual.
In terms of structure, the organization must have specific language in its organizing documents, such as articles of incorporation or trust documents, that limit its purposes to those that qualify for exempt status. It should also have a dissolution of assets provision that ensures assets are distributed for exempt purposes upon dissolution.
Moreover, the organization must adhere to the public support test, which requires it to receive a substantial part of its support from the general public or from governmental units or through contributions from the public. Finally, it must file the appropriate application form, typically Form 1023 or Form 1023-EZ, along with required documentation and pay the applicable user fee.
Compliance with these requirements is essential for an organization to obtain and maintain its 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status in the United States.
Of course. The Federal Government is not on a lifetime support mission. HE is obligated to do everything "Necessary and Proper" to oversee and command the Executive Branch.
Here's a case which should be binding precedent: Bob Jones University v. United States, 461 U.S. 574 (1983), Held:
Neither petitioner qualifies as a tax-exempt organization under 501(c)(3). Pp. 585-605.
(a) An examination of the IRC's framework and the background of congressional purposes reveals unmistakable evidence that underlying all relevant parts of the IRC is the intent that entitlement to tax exemption depends on meeting certain common-law standards of charity - namely, that an institution seeking tax-exempt status must serve a public purpose and not be contrary to established public policy. Thus, to warrant exemption under 501(c)(3), an institution must fall within a category specified in that section and must demonstrably serve and be in harmony with the public interest, and the institution's purpose must not be so at odds with the common community conscience as to undermine any public benefit that might otherwise be conferred. Pp. 585-592.
(b) The IRS's 1970 interpretation of 501(c)(3) was correct. It would be wholly incompatible with the concepts underlying tax exemption to grant tax-exempt status to racially discriminatory private educational entities. Whatever may be the rationale for such private schools' policies, racial discrimination in education is contrary to public policy. Racially discriminatory educational institutions cannot be viewed as conferring a public benefit within the above "charitable" concept or within the congressional intent underlying 501(c)(3). Pp. 592-596.
(c) The IRS did not exceed its authority when it announced its interpretation of 501(c)(3) in 1970 and 1971. Such interpretation is wholly consistent with what Congress, the Executive, and the courts had previously declared. And the actions of Congress since 1970 leave no doubt that the IRS reached the correct conclusion in exercising its authority. Pp. 596-602.
(d) The Government's fundamental, overriding interest in eradicating racial discrimination in education substantially outweighs whatever burden denial of tax benefits places on petitioners' exercise of their religious beliefs. Petitioners' asserted interests cannot be accommodated with that compelling governmental interest, and no less restrictive means are available to achieve the governmental interest. Pp. 602-604.
(e) The IRS properly applied its policy to both petitioners. Goldsboro admits that it maintains racially discriminatory policies, and, contrary to Bob Jones University's contention that it is not racially discriminatory, discrimination on the basis of racial affiliation and association is a form of racial discrimination. P. 605." https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/461/574.html
I can't wait for some enterprising lawyer to initiate a class action lawsuit for discrimination against Harvard asking for $100 billion in damages. I know they only have $46 billion but that would still make a good settlement.
This Pope was a Communist. Communism and Caring for People are polar opposites. Communism and Christianity are polar opposites. Sorry to be the guy pointing out the obvious, but someone has to do it.
I was surprised that you didn’t cite this case, Bob Jones vs. United Stayes, regarding revocation of tax exempt status of an education facility. SCOTUS found cause.
Mr. Dershowitz, I am a fan, but I am NOT very tech Savey. I couldn't find an email address for you so, I'm posting here.
I would be interested in learning from you about the concept of sovereignty in America. I have read it is the citizen but there are questions regarding that and it is confusing to me.
Any claims that Trump’s policies are for the purpose of fighting discrimination are fatuous and factitious. They are right out of the fascist playbook.
I appreciate your still teaching me. Was in your class as a 1L at HLS in 1993. I was president of the Harvard Jewish Law Students Association in 1995. In fact I found my Jewish identity at HLS after a secular upbringing. I feel that at the time my classmates and professors were 1/4 to 1/3 Jewish back then and I remember having an Israeli professor and there being Israeli LLMs. Unbelievable how much Harvard has changed since I received my JD in 1996. Interested to know your thoughts on the perplexing evolution of antisemitism and antizionism at Harvard over the last 30 years and do you think it is as pernicious in the law school as it is at Harvard as a whole?
He headlines this as "My Legal Analysis". So how good an analyst is he? The starting point is amorality. He roleplays instead the Ultimate Defense Attorney, not seeking truth but getting an advantage for his client, generally the Jewish State or a member of his religio-ethnc group.. Does he stand for legal research before proclaiming his conclusions. Tht is not generally apparent. When podcasting about International Humanitarian Law and the Genocide Convention, Dershowitz clearly gave support to the impression that he had neither read the relevant texts nor studied ICC precedent. He resorted instead to epithets and allegations fuelling Jewish paranoia.
On getting the most important personal document of his life issued, the non-prosecution agreement from DA Alex Acosta covering Dershowitz' alleged pedo serial rape connected to the Epstein Grooming Orgnization, Dershowitz was unaware that the agreement violated the Federal -Victims Rights Act and was therefore invalid.. Lots of angry noise. Not much substance. Maybe this is Dershowitz's epitaph.
Good program! Exactly my sentiments of Larry David - go back to Hollywood & your day job, you’re an embarrassment to civilization!
Forgot to add an aside to AD’s comments/defense about defending people of questionable appeal - I did reject veterinary medical service to the head of Aryan Nations, Rev. (?) Butler, and his dog while I served on the faculty of a university. Students were shocked, but I told him his views are an anathema to the ideals of this country. He shook my hands and thanked me anyway and I walked out of the exam room. Ironically, the school was celebrating MLK day soon thereafter. I never understood why lawyers and doctors have to provide their services to horrific individuals.
Here! Here! Rational and commendable analysis! Thank you!
Hear him, hear him!
Sad how far Harvard has fallen.
Into the WOKE sinkhole.... It may never find its way out.
Dr Dershowitz, you know they can. Tax exemption doesn't come lightly, and the requirements for tax exemption is extensive.
What follows is an AICPT response:
To qualify for a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status in the United States, an organization must meet several requirements as stipulated by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Firstly, the organization must be organized and operated exclusively for one or more exempt purposes, such as charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, or the prevention of cruelty to children or animals. Additionally, it must not be operated for the benefit of any private individual or shareholder.
Furthermore, the organization must not engage in substantial lobbying activities or participate in any political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office. It should also refrain from conducting any activities that do not further its exempt purposes. The organization must ensure that its net earnings do not inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual.
In terms of structure, the organization must have specific language in its organizing documents, such as articles of incorporation or trust documents, that limit its purposes to those that qualify for exempt status. It should also have a dissolution of assets provision that ensures assets are distributed for exempt purposes upon dissolution.
Moreover, the organization must adhere to the public support test, which requires it to receive a substantial part of its support from the general public or from governmental units or through contributions from the public. Finally, it must file the appropriate application form, typically Form 1023 or Form 1023-EZ, along with required documentation and pay the applicable user fee.
Compliance with these requirements is essential for an organization to obtain and maintain its 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status in the United States.
Of course. The Federal Government is not on a lifetime support mission. HE is obligated to do everything "Necessary and Proper" to oversee and command the Executive Branch.
Here's a case which should be binding precedent: Bob Jones University v. United States, 461 U.S. 574 (1983), Held:
Neither petitioner qualifies as a tax-exempt organization under 501(c)(3). Pp. 585-605.
(a) An examination of the IRC's framework and the background of congressional purposes reveals unmistakable evidence that underlying all relevant parts of the IRC is the intent that entitlement to tax exemption depends on meeting certain common-law standards of charity - namely, that an institution seeking tax-exempt status must serve a public purpose and not be contrary to established public policy. Thus, to warrant exemption under 501(c)(3), an institution must fall within a category specified in that section and must demonstrably serve and be in harmony with the public interest, and the institution's purpose must not be so at odds with the common community conscience as to undermine any public benefit that might otherwise be conferred. Pp. 585-592.
(b) The IRS's 1970 interpretation of 501(c)(3) was correct. It would be wholly incompatible with the concepts underlying tax exemption to grant tax-exempt status to racially discriminatory private educational entities. Whatever may be the rationale for such private schools' policies, racial discrimination in education is contrary to public policy. Racially discriminatory educational institutions cannot be viewed as conferring a public benefit within the above "charitable" concept or within the congressional intent underlying 501(c)(3). Pp. 592-596.
(c) The IRS did not exceed its authority when it announced its interpretation of 501(c)(3) in 1970 and 1971. Such interpretation is wholly consistent with what Congress, the Executive, and the courts had previously declared. And the actions of Congress since 1970 leave no doubt that the IRS reached the correct conclusion in exercising its authority. Pp. 596-602.
(d) The Government's fundamental, overriding interest in eradicating racial discrimination in education substantially outweighs whatever burden denial of tax benefits places on petitioners' exercise of their religious beliefs. Petitioners' asserted interests cannot be accommodated with that compelling governmental interest, and no less restrictive means are available to achieve the governmental interest. Pp. 602-604.
(e) The IRS properly applied its policy to both petitioners. Goldsboro admits that it maintains racially discriminatory policies, and, contrary to Bob Jones University's contention that it is not racially discriminatory, discrimination on the basis of racial affiliation and association is a form of racial discrimination. P. 605." https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/461/574.html
Good show. I agree 100% with your discussions. Thank you.
I can't wait for some enterprising lawyer to initiate a class action lawsuit for discrimination against Harvard asking for $100 billion in damages. I know they only have $46 billion but that would still make a good settlement.
I hope so
This Pope was a Communist. Communism and Caring for People are polar opposites. Communism and Christianity are polar opposites. Sorry to be the guy pointing out the obvious, but someone has to do it.
I was surprised that you didn’t cite this case, Bob Jones vs. United Stayes, regarding revocation of tax exempt status of an education facility. SCOTUS found cause.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Jones_University_v._United_States
Mr. Dershowitz, I am a fan, but I am NOT very tech Savey. I couldn't find an email address for you so, I'm posting here.
I would be interested in learning from you about the concept of sovereignty in America. I have read it is the citizen but there are questions regarding that and it is confusing to me.
Thank you
Thank you professor. I look forward to many more of your videos.
Any claims that Trump’s policies are for the purpose of fighting discrimination are fatuous and factitious. They are right out of the fascist playbook.
Thank you, Professor!
I appreciate your still teaching me. Was in your class as a 1L at HLS in 1993. I was president of the Harvard Jewish Law Students Association in 1995. In fact I found my Jewish identity at HLS after a secular upbringing. I feel that at the time my classmates and professors were 1/4 to 1/3 Jewish back then and I remember having an Israeli professor and there being Israeli LLMs. Unbelievable how much Harvard has changed since I received my JD in 1996. Interested to know your thoughts on the perplexing evolution of antisemitism and antizionism at Harvard over the last 30 years and do you think it is as pernicious in the law school as it is at Harvard as a whole?
He headlines this as "My Legal Analysis". So how good an analyst is he? The starting point is amorality. He roleplays instead the Ultimate Defense Attorney, not seeking truth but getting an advantage for his client, generally the Jewish State or a member of his religio-ethnc group.. Does he stand for legal research before proclaiming his conclusions. Tht is not generally apparent. When podcasting about International Humanitarian Law and the Genocide Convention, Dershowitz clearly gave support to the impression that he had neither read the relevant texts nor studied ICC precedent. He resorted instead to epithets and allegations fuelling Jewish paranoia.
On getting the most important personal document of his life issued, the non-prosecution agreement from DA Alex Acosta covering Dershowitz' alleged pedo serial rape connected to the Epstein Grooming Orgnization, Dershowitz was unaware that the agreement violated the Federal -Victims Rights Act and was therefore invalid.. Lots of angry noise. Not much substance. Maybe this is Dershowitz's epitaph.