State v. Ahmed Muhammad

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that nondiscriminatory ad valorem taxation “deprives the Federal Government of nothing to which it is entitled”
• noting that “[w]hat we do in this case is to merely ‘draw a line,’ and it is, admittedly, a difficult line to draw”
• noting that “nondiscriminatory ad valorem” and other types of taxes share “the characteristic that they cannot be selectively imposed and increased so as substantially to impair or prohibit importation”
• noting that “nondiscriminatory ad valorem” and other types of taxes share “the characteristic that they cannot be selectively imposed and increased so as substantially to impair or prohibit importation”
• overruling Low v. Austin, 13 Wall. 29 (1872), because it ignored the language and objectives of the Import-Export Clause and misread earlier Court precedent
• describing reasons behind and analysis of Import-Export Clause to determine whether a tax constitutes an impermissible impost or duty

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).