Florida v. Mellon, 273 U.S. 12 (1927)

Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 273 U.S. 1, click here.

Florida v. Mellon

No. ___, Original

Rule to show cause argued November 23, 1926
Rule discharged January 3, 1927
273 U.S. 12

1. To come within the original jurisdiction of this Court, a suit by a state must be for redress of a wrong, or enforcement of a right, susceptible of judicial redress or enforcement. P. 16.

2. The federal inheritance tax law is constitutional, and must prevail over any conflicting provisions of state laws or constitutions. P. 17.

3. The constitutional requirement of uniformity in excise taxation (Art. I, § 8, cl. 1) is satisfied when, by the provisions of a tax law, the rule of liability under it is the same in all parts of the United States. P. 17.

4. The fact that the provisions of the federal act allowing deduction of state inheritance taxes in computing the federal tax cannot be availed of in Florida, since that state, by her constitution, is forbidden to tax inheritance, does not sustain an allegation that the federal tax will directly injure her revenue by inducing the withdrawal of property from the state. P. 17.

5. A state can not, as parens patriae, represent her citizens in a suit to protect them from unconstitutional inequalities alleged to result from a federal tax law. P. 18.

Leave to file bill denied.

Upon a rule to show cause why the petition of the State of Florida to file a bill of complaint in this Court should not be granted. The proposed bill sought to enjoin the Secretary of the Treasury and the Commissioner of Internal Revenue from attempting to collect federal inheritance taxes in Florida.