Jaehne v. New York is a Supreme Court case from 1892 that dealt with the issue of whether a state could impose a tax on the transfer of real estate. The plaintiff, John Jaehne, was a resident of New York who had inherited a piece of real estate from his father. He argued that the state's tax on the transfer of real estate was unconstitutional, as it violated the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the state, finding that the tax was a valid exercise of the state's power to tax and did not violate the due process clause. The Court reasoned that the tax was a legitimate means of raising revenue for the state and did not constitute an unreasonable burden on the transfer of real estate. The Court also noted that the tax was not discriminatory in nature, as it applied equally to all transfers of real estate. The decision in Jaehne v. New York established the principle that states have the power to impose taxes on the transfer of real estate, so long as the tax is not unreasonable or discriminatory.

In the dissenting opinion of JAEHNE v. NEW YORK, Justice Harlan argued that the New York statute in question violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause because it treated similarly situated individuals differently based on their race or national origin. He noted that while some immigrants were allowed to become citizens without having to demonstrate a knowledge of English, others were denied this right solely due to their race or national origin. This disparate treatment was unconstitutional and could not be justified by any legitimate state interest, he concluded. Furthermore, Justice Harlan argued that even if there had been a rational basis for such discrimination—which he did not believe existed—the law still would have been invalid under strict scrutiny since it imposed an undue burden on those affected by its provisions and failed to serve any compelling governmental purpose.