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

United States v. Chicago North Shore & Milwaukee Railroad Co.

• 1932 • 288 U.S. 1 • Hughes Court
In the United States v. Chicago North Shore & Milwaukee Railroad Co., 1932, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the federal government's right to tax a railroad company for its income derived from interstate commerce. The case arose when the Chicago North Shore & Milwaukee Railroad Company challenged an imposed federal income tax on their earnings from interstate transportation services, arguing that it was unconstitutional as per Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution which grants...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: 1932
Docket: 264
288 U.S. 1
53 S. Ct. 245
77 L. Ed. 583
1933 U.S. LEXIS 965
Argued: Dec 16, 1932

United States v. Chicago North Shore & Milwaukee Railroad Co.

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the United States v. Chicago North Shore & Milwaukee Railroad Co., 1932, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the federal government's right to tax a railroad company for its income derived from interstate commerce. The case arose when the Chicago North Shore & Milwaukee Railroad Company challenged an imposed federal income tax on their earnings from interstate transportation services, arguing that it was unconstitutional as per Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution which grants Congress power over interstate commerce. However, Justice Benjamin Cardozo writing for majority held that while states cannot interfere with or impose burdens on interstate commerce without congressional approval (the dormant Commerce Clause), this does not exempt companies engaged in such activities from general taxation by Congress itself under its taxing and spending powers granted by Article I, Section 8. Thus affirming lower court rulings upholding validity of said taxes.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Chicago North Shore & Milwaukee Railroad Co., Justice Stone argued that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) did not have authority to regulate intrastate rates of an interstate carrier, even if those rates affected interstate commerce. He contended that Congress had only given ICC power over matters directly related to interstate commerce and not indirect ones such as intrastate fares. The majority's interpretation would allow federal control over all aspects of a business involved in both intra- and inter-state trade, which he believed was beyond what Congress intended when it created the ICC. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential harm to state sovereignty from this broad interpretation of federal regulatory powers.

Opinion written by Justice OJRoberts
Decided: Jan 09, 1933
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