Court Opinion

ID: 9471353
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 03:30:08.164732+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:42:22.156436
License: Public Domain

ESCHBACH, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
As I read the Templetons' pro se brief, I believe that they contend that the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment creates a constitutionally required exemption from social security taxes for those religiously opposed to public-funded social insurance. They have standing to make this argument because if they are correct, then they do not owe a $227 deficiency. I would thus reach the merits of the claim and reject it in light of United States v. Lee, 455 U.S. 252, 102 S.Ct. 1051, 71 L.Ed.2d 127 (1982), which held that the Free Exercise Clause does not relieve taxpayers such as the Templetons from their obligations to pay social security taxes.