US Constitution

Below are selected readings related to Constitutional law.

Art. I, Sec. 9, Cl. 4

Art. I, Sec. 9, Cl. 4 states that “No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.”

  • Hylton v. United States, 3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 171 (1796). [See esp. Justice Paterson, p. 177]
  • Pacific Ins. Co. v. Soule, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 433 (1869).
  • Veazie Bank v. Fenno, 75 U.S. (8 Wall.) 533 (1869).
  • Scholey v. Rew, 90 U.S. (23 Wall.) 331 (1875).
  • Springer v. United States, 102 U.S. 586 (1881).
  • Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan & Trust Co., 157 U.S. 429, 573 (1895); 158 U.S. 601 (1895).
  • Knowlton v. Moore, 178 U.S. 41, 80 (1900).
  • Nicol v. Ames, 173 U.S. 509 (1899).
  • Knowlton v. Moore, 178 U.S. 41 (1900).
  • Patton v. Brady, 184 U.S. 608 (1902).
  • Thomas v. United States, 192 U.S. 363 (1904).
  • Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107 (1911).
  • Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co., 240 U.S. 103 (1916).
  • Billings v. United States, 232 U.S. 261 (1914).
  • New York Trust Co. v. Eisner, 256 U.S. 345, 349 (1921).
  • Phillips v. Dime Trust & S.D. Co., 284 U.S. 160 (1931).
  • Tyler v. United States, 281 U.S. 497 (1930).
  • Fernandez v. Wiener, 326 U.S. 340 (1945).
  • Chase Nat’l Bank v. United States, 278 U.S. 327 (1929).
  • United States v. Manufacturers Nat’l Bank, 363 U.S. 194, 198–201 (1960).
  • Bromley v. McCaughn, 280 U.S. 124, 136 (1929).
  • Helvering v. Bullard, 303 U.S. 297 (1938).
  • Loughborough v. Blake, 18 U.S. (5 Wheat.) 317 (1820).
  • De Treville v. Smalls, 98 U.S. 517, 527 (1879).

28 Stat. 509, 553 (1894).

J. MADISON, THE DEBATES IN THE FEDERAL CONVENTION OF 1787 435 (G. Hunt & J. Scott eds., Greenwood Press ed. 1970). THE WORKS OF ALEXANDER HAMILTON 845 (J. Hamilton ed., 1851). “If the meaning of the word excise is to be sought in the British statutes, it will be found to include the duty on carriages, which is there considered as an excise, and then must necessarily be uniform and liable to apportionment; consequently, not a direct tax.”

Art. I, Sec. 9, Cl. 5

Art. I, Sec. 9, Cl. 5 states that “No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.”

“However, the clause does not interdict a 'user fee,' that is, a charge that lacks the attributes of a generally applicable tax or duty and is designed to compensate for government supplied services, facilities, or benefits,”

  • Turpin v. Burgess, 117 U.S. 504, 507 (1886).
  • Almy v. California, 65 U.S. 169, 174 (1861).
  • Dooley v. United States, 183 U.S. 151, 154 (1901).
  • Cornell v. Coyne, 192 U.S. 418, 428 (1904).
  • United States v. IBM, 517 U.S. 843, 850–61 (1996).
  • United States v. United States Shoe Corp., 523 U.S. 360, 363 (1998).
  • Spalding & Bros. v. Edwards, 262 U.S. 66 (1923).
  • Thompson v. United States, 142 U.S. 471 (1892).
  • Peck & Co. v. Lowe, 247 U.S. 165 (1918);
  • National Paper Co. v. Bowers, 266 U.S. 373 (1924).
  • Fairbank v. United States, 181 U.S. 283 (1901).
  • United States v. Hvoslef, 237 U.S. 1 (1915).
  • Thames & Mersey Inc. v. United States, 237 U.S. 19 (1915).
  • Pace v. Burgess, 92 U.S. 372 (1876).
  • Turpin v. Burgess, 117 U.S. 504, 505 (1886).