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

Kenosha v. Campbell

1869 • 131 U.S. xcvii • Chase Court
Kenosha v. Campbell was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a state could tax the property of a non-resident. The case was brought by the city of Kenosha, Wisconsin, which had imposed a tax on the property of a non-resident, William Campbell. Campbell argued that the tax was unconstitutional because it violated the privileges and immunities clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court held that the tax was constitutional, ruling that the privileges...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 Chase Court
Term: 1869
Docket: 144
131 U.S. xcvii
19 L. Ed. 711
1870 U.S. LEXIS 1223

Kenosha v. Campbell

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

Kenosha v. Campbell was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a state could tax the property of a non-resident. The case was brought by the city of Kenosha, Wisconsin, which had imposed a tax on the property of a non-resident, William Campbell. Campbell argued that the tax was unconstitutional because it violated the privileges and immunities clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court held that the tax was constitutional, ruling that the privileges and immunities clause did not apply to non-residents. The Court reasoned that the clause was intended to protect the rights of citizens of one state when they travel to another state, and that it did not apply to non-residents. The Court also held that the tax was not a violation of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, as it was a reasonable exercise of the state's power to tax. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that the tax imposed by the city of Kenosha on the property of a non-resident was constitutional. The Court reasoned that the privileges and immunities clause of the Fourteenth Amendment did not apply to non-residents, and that the tax was a reasonable exercise of the state's power to tax.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Kenosha v. Campbell, Justice Field delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority had misconstrued the language of an act passed by Congress to incorporate the city of Kenosha. The act provided for certain taxes and assessments on property within its limits, but did not provide any authority for levying such taxes or assessments upon lands lying outside its boundaries. Justice Field maintained that this was intentional; Congress intended only to grant power over those areas actually included within the corporate limits as defined in their charter. He further argued that if it were otherwise, then cities would be granted unlimited powers over all adjacent territories without consent from either state legislatures or local governments - a result clearly contrary to both constitutional law and public policy.

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