Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Fisk v. Jefferson Police Jury

• 1885 • 116 U.S. 131 • Waite Court
In Fisk v. Jefferson Police Jury, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a Louisiana statute that allowed a police jury to levy a tax on the property of a railroad company was constitutional. The railroad company argued that the statute violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court held that the statute was constitutional. The Court reasoned that the police jury had the power to levy taxes on the property of the railroad company, and that...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Waite Court
Term: 1885
Docket: 70
116 U.S. 131
6 S. Ct. 329
29 L. Ed. 587
1885 U.S. LEXIS 1899

Fisk v. Jefferson Police Jury

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In Fisk v. Jefferson Police Jury, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a Louisiana statute that allowed a police jury to levy a tax on the property of a railroad company was constitutional. The railroad company argued that the statute violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court held that the statute was constitutional. The Court reasoned that the police jury had the power to levy taxes on the property of the railroad company, and that the Due Process Clause did not prohibit the police jury from exercising that power. The Court also noted that the statute did not discriminate against the railroad company, and that the tax was not excessive or oppressive. The Court concluded that the statute was constitutional and that the police jury had the power to levy the tax on the property of the railroad company. The Court's decision was unanimous.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In Fisk v. Jefferson Police Jury, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a Louisiana statute that allowed for the taxation of certain railroad property violated the Constitution's Contract Clause. The majority opinion held that it did not violate this clause and thus upheld the law. Justice Field dissented from this decision, arguing that by taxing these railroads in such an unequal manner, it constituted a violation of their rights under both state and federal contracts as well as other constitutional provisions. He argued further that if states were allowed to tax railroads unequally then they would be able to manipulate them into providing services at lower rates than those agreed upon in their contracts with one another or with private parties; thus allowing them to gain an unfair advantage over competitors who had no control over how much they could charge for services provided on public roads or railways. In conclusion, he believed that any attempt by states to interfere with existing contractual arrangements between private parties should be considered unconstitutional unless there is clear evidence showing otherwise.

Opinion written by Justice SFMiller
Decided: Dec 21, 1885
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms