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. Gilliat

• 1896 • 164 U.S. 42 • Fuller Court
In the United States v. Gilliat case of 1896, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter involving customs duties. The defendant, Gilliat, had imported goods from Canada into Vermont and was charged with paying import duties under U.S law. However, he argued that because his goods were in transit to another country (in this case England), they should not be subject to these charges as per international law principles regarding goods in transit. The court disagreed with Gilliat's argument 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 Fuller Court
Term: 1896
Docket: 535
164 U.S. 42
17 S. Ct. 16
41 L. Ed. 344
1896 U.S. LEXIS 1837

United States v. Gilliat

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the United States v. Gilliat case of 1896, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter involving customs duties. The defendant, Gilliat, had imported goods from Canada into Vermont and was charged with paying import duties under U.S law. However, he argued that because his goods were in transit to another country (in this case England), they should not be subject to these charges as per international law principles regarding goods in transit. The court disagreed with Gilliat's argument stating that once the merchandise entered U.S territory it became subject to local laws including those related to customs duties regardless of its final destination or whether it remained unopened during its time within U.S borders.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Gilliat, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision to uphold a tax on foreign-built yachts violated principles of international law and comity among nations. He contended that such a tax was discriminatory against foreigners and thus inconsistent with America's obligations as part of an international community. Furthermore, he believed it was unconstitutional because it interfered with Congress' exclusive power over commerce regulation. In his view, states should not have authority to impose taxes or duties on imports or exports without congressional approval; doing so could lead to conflicts between different states or between individual states and foreign countries. This case represented one instance where state action had potential implications for national policy in areas constitutionally reserved for federal control.

Opinion written by Justice RWPeckham
Decided: Oct 26, 1896
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