As one who often taps scholarly tax veins in unlikely places (e.g., The Federal Tax Implications of Bush v. Gore, 79 Wash. U. L.Q. 749 (2001)), I was struck by this week’s issue of SmartCLIP (the wonderful service provided by the University of Washington Law Library in emailing to subscribers each week a customized list of recently published law review articles in designated subject areas (along with links to the articles on Lexis and Westlaw)).  The editors placed Readings of Lawrence v. Texas,11 Widener L. Rev. i-ii, 171-329 (2005), in the "Federal Income Tax" subject category.  I eagerly scanned the list of articles in the symposium, ready to tip my hat to whoever found the tax issues lurking in the Court’s opinion finding a constitutional right to sodomy.  But none of the articles contain a whit of tax discussion.  So how did the symposium end up classified in the tax category?  My guess: someone mistook "Texas" for "Taxes"!