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

Panhandle Oil Company v. Mississippi Ex Rel. Knox, Attorney General

• 1927 • 277 U.S. 218 • Taft Court
In the case of Panhandle Oil Company v. Mississippi ex rel. Knox, Attorney General (1927), the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving state taxation and interstate commerce. The State of Mississippi had imposed a tax on gasoline that was purchased out-of-state but intended for sale within its borders. The Panhandle Oil Company challenged this law, arguing it violated the Commerce Clause of the U.S Constitution by placing an undue burden on interstate commerce. The court upheld...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 Taft Court
Term: 1927
Docket: 288
277 U.S. 218
48 S. Ct. 451
72 L. Ed. 857
1928 U.S. LEXIS 684
Argued: Mar 05, 1928

Panhandle Oil Company v. Mississippi Ex Rel. Knox, Attorney General

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Panhandle Oil Company v. Mississippi ex rel. Knox, Attorney General (1927), the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving state taxation and interstate commerce. The State of Mississippi had imposed a tax on gasoline that was purchased out-of-state but intended for sale within its borders. The Panhandle Oil Company challenged this law, arguing it violated the Commerce Clause of the U.S Constitution by placing an undue burden on interstate commerce. The court upheld Mississippi's right to impose such taxes in a 5-4 decision, stating that while states cannot interfere with or discriminate against interstate commerce directly, they can indirectly influence it through legitimate exercises of their taxing power as long as those measures do not create direct burdens or obstructions to trade between states. This ruling marked an important shift in how courts interpreted restrictions placed upon state powers under the Commerce Clause and set precedent for future cases dealing with similar issues.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Panhandle Oil Company v. Mississippi ex rel. Knox, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., joined by Justices Louis Brandeis and Harlan Fiske Stone, argued that the tax imposed by Mississippi on gasoline brought into the state from elsewhere did not violate the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. He reasoned that while it was true that interstate commerce should be free from discriminatory taxes, this principle did not apply to a non-discriminatory tax applied equally to all gasoline sold within a state's borders regardless of its origin. The justices contended that such taxation is part of a state's inherent power to raise revenue and does not interfere with Congress' authority over interstate commerce unless it discriminates against out-of-state goods or directly regulates interstate transactions.

Opinion written by Justice PButler
Decided: May 14, 1928
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