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

Williams v. Fears

• 1900 • 179 U.S. 270 • Fuller Court
In the case of Williams v. Fears, 1900, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Georgia law that imposed a tax on agents who recruited workers to leave the state for employment elsewhere. The plaintiff argued that this law violated his rights under both the Commerce Clause and Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. However, Justice Edward Douglass White Jr., writing for the majority, held that states have an inherent power to regulate their internal affairs and protect their...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: 1900
Docket: 287
179 U.S. 270
21 S. Ct. 128
45 L. Ed. 186
1900 U.S. LEXIS 1867
Argued: Oct 29, 1900

Williams v. Fears

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Williams v. Fears, 1900, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Georgia law that imposed a tax on agents who recruited workers to leave the state for employment elsewhere. The plaintiff argued that this law violated his rights under both the Commerce Clause and Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. However, Justice Edward Douglass White Jr., writing for the majority, held that states have an inherent power to regulate their internal affairs and protect their citizens' welfare; thus they can impose such taxes without violating constitutional principles. He further stated that recruiting laborers is not commerce but merely impacts it indirectly so does not fall within federal jurisdiction under the Commerce Clause. As per Fourteenth Amendment claim, he noted there was no discrimination as all recruiters were taxed equally regardless of destination or purpose behind recruitment.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Williams v. Fears, Justice John Marshall Harlan argued that the tax imposed by Georgia on employment agencies recruiting workers for out-of-state jobs was unconstitutional. He believed it violated both the Commerce Clause and Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. According to him, this law interfered with interstate commerce as it essentially taxed individuals seeking employment outside of Georgia, which could discourage such activity. Furthermore, he saw this as a violation of equal protection under law because it unfairly targeted one specific class of citizens - those looking for work in other states through these agencies - without a justifiable reason related to public health or safety concerns.

Opinion written by Justice MWFuller
Decided: Dec 10, 1900
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