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

Graves Et Al., Commissioners Constituting The State Tax Commission Of New York, v. New York Ex Rel. O'keefe

• 1938 • 306 U.S. 466 • Hughes Court
In the case of Graves et al., Commissioners Constituting the State Tax Commission of New York, v. New York ex rel. O'Keefe (1938), the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a state could tax income received by its residents from federal government employment without violating constitutional principles of intergovernmental tax immunity. The court held that such taxation did not interfere with federal sovereignty or operations and was therefore permissible under the Constitution's Supremacy Clause. This...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 Hughes Court
Term: 1938
Docket: 478
306 U.S. 466
59 S. Ct. 595
83 L. Ed. 927
1939 U.S. LEXIS 980
Argued: Mar 06, 1939

Graves Et Al., Commissioners Constituting The State Tax Commission Of New York, v. New York Ex Rel. O'keefe

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Graves et al., Commissioners Constituting the State Tax Commission of New York, v. New York ex rel. O'Keefe (1938), the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a state could tax income received by its residents from federal government employment without violating constitutional principles of intergovernmental tax immunity. The court held that such taxation did not interfere with federal sovereignty or operations and was therefore permissible under the Constitution's Supremacy Clause. This decision overturned previous rulings which had established a doctrine of reciprocal tax immunities between states and federal government employees, thereby allowing for broader state taxing powers over federally-sourced income.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Graves v. New York ex rel. O'Keefe, Justice McReynolds argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state tax on federal employees was inconsistent with previous Supreme Court rulings and threatened the separation of powers between federal and state governments. He contended that this ruling could potentially lead to states imposing burdensome taxes on federal operations within their borders, thereby undermining national sovereignty. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's interpretation of constitutional immunity as reciprocal between states and the federal government; instead, he believed it should be unilateral in favor of protecting federal interests from potential interference by individual states.

Opinion written by Justice HFStone
Decided: Mar 27, 1939
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