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

Sunshine Anthracite Coal Co. v. Adkins, Collector Of Internal Revenue

• 1939 • 310 U.S. 381 • Hughes Court
The U.S. Supreme Court case Sunshine Anthracite Coal Co. v. Adkins, Collector of Internal Revenue in 1939 revolved around the issue of whether or not a tax imposed on coal producers by the Bituminous Coal Conservation Act was constitutional. The plaintiff, Sunshine Anthracite Coal Co., argued that this act violated their Fifth Amendment rights as it unfairly targeted them for taxation and interfered with interstate commerce regulations. However, the court ruled against them stating 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 Hughes Court
Term: 1939
Docket: 804
310 U.S. 381
60 S. Ct. 907
84 L. Ed. 1263
1940 U.S. LEXIS 1264
Argued: Apr 29, 1940

Sunshine Anthracite Coal Co. v. Adkins, Collector Of Internal Revenue

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

The U.S. Supreme Court case Sunshine Anthracite Coal Co. v. Adkins, Collector of Internal Revenue in 1939 revolved around the issue of whether or not a tax imposed on coal producers by the Bituminous Coal Conservation Act was constitutional. The plaintiff, Sunshine Anthracite Coal Co., argued that this act violated their Fifth Amendment rights as it unfairly targeted them for taxation and interfered with interstate commerce regulations. However, the court ruled against them stating that Congress had full authority to impose such taxes under its power to regulate interstate commerce and protect public interest in maintaining fair competition among businesses involved in producing bituminous coal - a vital national resource at that time.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Sunshine Anthracite Coal Co. v. Adkins, it was argued that the Bituminous Coal Act of 1937 violated constitutional principles by delegating legislative power to private entities - in this case, coal producers and their representatives on a National Bituminous Coal Commission who were tasked with setting minimum prices for coal sales. The dissenters contended that such delegation is unconstitutional as it allows private interests to determine public policy without adequate governmental oversight or control. They also expressed concern about potential abuses of power and conflicts of interest inherent in allowing an industry to regulate itself through price-fixing mechanisms which could potentially harm consumers and other stakeholders not represented on the commission.

Opinion written by Justice WODouglas
Decided: May 20, 1940
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