Sedgwick v. Commissioner
A similar case was made against the United States and settled in 1995. The settlement is unknown because it was done behind closed doors, and no written result was rendered, but it is known that the result was made in favor of the couple, meaning the government conceded the case.
IRS Code § 213 states that you cannot deduct surrogacy expenses. Section 213 allows for expenses to be deductible for yourself or your dependents, but surrogates are not usually your dependent, so the deduction is not allowed, hence the Morrissey ruling.
If this is the law and it is unshakable, then why would there be a settlement in favor of a petitioner? And if deductions were allowed in an earlier case, then why was it not extended to Morrissey and his partner who were simply “choosing” to obey their vows and respect the tenets of marriage, just as a heterosexual couple would do in the same situation?
