Hylton v. United States
Hylton v. United States, 3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 171 (1796), is an early United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a yearly tax on carriages did not violate the Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 and Article I, Section 9, Clause 4 requirements for the apportioning of direct taxes. The Court concluded that the carriage tax was not a direct tax, which would require apportionment among the states. The Court noted that a tax on land was an example of a direct tax that was contemplated by the Constitution.
| Hylton v. United States | |
|---|---|
Supreme Court of the United States | |
| Argued February 23, 1796 Decided March 8, 1796 | |
| Full case name | Daniel Hylton, Plaintiff in Error v. the United States |
| Citations | 3 U.S. 171 (more) |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Defendant convicted, Circuit Court for the District of Virginia |
| Subsequent | None |
| Holding | |
| A tax on the possession of goods is not a "direct" tax, which must be apportioned under Article I of the Constitution. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Seriatim | Chase |
| Seriatim | Paterson |
| Seriatim | Iredell |
| Seriatim | Wilson |
| Ellsworth and Cushing took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. art. I; An Act laying duties upon Carriages for the conveyance of Persons | |
The case is also significant for being the first case by the Supreme Court to rely on judicial review, later formally established by Marbury v. Madison (1803), to decide whether a statute of Congress was unconstitutional.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.