Questions Presented
Whether the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution allows States to tax goods distributed by out-of-state wholesalers more heavily than goods distributed by in-state wholesalers.
Case Updates
Cert. petition denied
January 27, 2014
U.S. Chamber urges Supreme Court to clarify proper treatment of state taxes discriminating against interstate commerce
January 02, 2014
In the brief, the U.S. Chamber urged the Supreme Court to grant the petition for a writ of certiorari and clarify that state taxes discriminating against interstate commerce in practical effect are unconstitutional under the Court’s precedents on the dormant Commerce Clause. Such discrimination is constitutionally problematic even when the state’s tax scheme does not overtly tax interstate commerce at a higher rate than intra-state commerce. Were it otherwise, States could avoid the reach of the Court’s precedents simply by developing subtle means to discriminate against out-of-state interests, creating a system inconsistent with the imperative for a uniform national economy that the Constitution was designed to foster.
Charles A. Rothfeld of Mayer Brown, LLP represented the U.S. Chamber as co-counsel to the National Chamber Litigation Center, Inc.
Case Documents
- State of Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal -- McLane Southern, Inc. v. Bridges (U.S. Supreme Court).pdf
- Cert. Petition -- McLane Southern, Inc. v. Bridges (U.S. Supreme Court).pdf
- Brief of Respondent -- McLane Southern, Inc. v. Bridges (U.S. Supreme Court).pdf
- U.S. Chamber Amicus Brief -- McLane Southern, Inc. v. Bridges (U.S. Supreme Court).pdf
- Top Tobacco & Republic Tobacco amicus brief -- McLane Southern, Inc. v. Bridges (U.S. Supreme Court).pdf
- IFDA & NAW amicus brief -- McLane Southern, Inc. v. Bridges (U.S. Supreme Court).pdf