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

The Common Council Of Alexandria v. Preston

1814 • 12 U.S. 53 • Marshall Court
The Common Council of Alexandria v. Preston was a case brought before the United States Supreme Court in 1814. The dispute centered around whether or not the City of Alexandria had authority to impose taxes on certain goods imported into its port by William Preston, who argued that only Congress could levy such taxes and that any attempt by the city to do so would be unconstitutional. In an opinion written by Chief Justice John Marshall, the court held that while Congress did have exclusive...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 Marshall Court
Term: 1814
12 U.S. 53
3 L. Ed. 485
1814 U.S. LEXIS 382
Argued: Feb 18, 1814

The Common Council Of Alexandria v. Preston

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

The Common Council of Alexandria v. Preston was a case brought before the United States Supreme Court in 1814. The dispute centered around whether or not the City of Alexandria had authority to impose taxes on certain goods imported into its port by William Preston, who argued that only Congress could levy such taxes and that any attempt by the city to do so would be unconstitutional. In an opinion written by Chief Justice John Marshall, the court held that while Congress did have exclusive power over imports and exports under Article I Section 8 Clause 3 of the Constitution, it also gave states concurrent powers with respect to taxation within their own borders as long as they did not interfere with federal laws or regulations. Therefore, since there was no conflict between state and federal law in this instance, it was determined that Alexandria had authority to tax goods imported into its port without violating constitutional principles.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In The Common Council of Alexandria v. Preston, the dissenting opinion argued that the court should not have dismissed the case without a hearing on its merits. The majority had held that because Preston was an officer of Congress and therefore immune from suit in state courts, there was no jurisdiction to hear it. However, Justice Johnson dissented and argued that while officers of Congress may be exempt from certain suits in state courts, this does not mean they are completely immune from all actions brought against them by states or their citizens. He further noted that if such immunity were granted then any wrongs committed by federal officers would go unpunished as they could never be sued for damages caused by their actions. Therefore he concluded that since this case involved a dispute between two private parties over property rights rather than any action taken under authority of Congress, it should have been heard on its merits instead of being dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction

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