Opinion ID: 2708638
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Application of the TIA

Text: Because the Demolition Tax is properly considered a tax, the TIA bars the Kathreins’ challenge to the exaction.4 The TIA is the state‐tax analogue to the Tax Anti‐Injunction Act, 26 U.S.C. § 7421(a), which bars suits designed to enjoin the collection of federal taxes. It furthers a healthy respect for federalism by preventing federal courts from interfering with the vital state function of collecting taxes. Admittedly, the text of the Act refers only to efforts “to enjoin, suspend, or restrain the assessment, levy or collection of any tax un‐ der State law,” whereas the Kathreins seek damages. 28 U.S.C. § 1341. But the Supreme Court, invoking the principal of comity, has interpreted the prohibition announced in the statute to bar all Section 1983 suits directly contesting the va‐ lidity of state tax schemes. Fair Assessment in Real Estate Assʹn, Inc. v. McNary, 454 U.S. 100, 116 (1981) (“[T]axpayers are barred by the principle of comity from asserting § 1983 actions against the validity of state tax systems in federal courts.”). The Court reasoned that “damages actions, no less than actions for an injunction, would hale state officers into federal court every time a taxpayer alleged the requisite el‐ ements of a § 1983 claim.” Id. at 115. The Court’s ruling in McNary dooms the Kathreins’ challenge, and the district court correctly dismissed those remaining claims. See Em‐ 4 The Kathreins effectively concede that Illinois courts provide a “plain, speedy, and effective remedy” for their state and constitutional claims against the Demolition Tax, so that statutory requirement is easily met. See App. Br. at 10 (“Plaintiffs admit they can object to the constitutionali‐ ty of defendants’ municipal ordinance in state court.”). 12 No. 12‐2958 press Casino, 651 F.3d at 725 (“[T]he duty of federal courts to cede litigation seeking to enjoin state tax statutes to the state courts (a ‘duty of comity’—that is, of respect for another sovereign) extends beyond the limits of the Tax Injunction Act.”).