Alabama Department of Revenue v. CSX Transportation, Inc.
| Alabama Department of Revenue v. CSX Transportation, Inc. | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued December 9, 2014 Decided March 4, 2015 | |
| Full case name | Alabama Department of Revenue, et al., Petitioners v. CSX Transportation, Inc. |
| Docket no. | 13-553 |
| Citations | 575 U.S. 21 (more) 135 S. Ct. 1136; 191 L. Ed. 2d 113 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | CSX Transp., Inc. v. Ala. Dep't of Revenue, 892 F. Supp. 2d 1300 (N.D. Ala. 2012); reversed, 720 F.3d 863 (11th Cir. 2013); cert. granted, 134 S. Ct. 2900 (2014). |
| Holding | |
| In determining sales tax discrimination, courts must view the state's tax scheme as a whole rather than just the challenged provision. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Scalia, joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan |
| Dissent | Thomas, joined by Ginsburg |
| Laws applied | |
| Railroad Revitalization and Regulation Reform Act of 1976 | |
Alabama Department of Revenue v. CSX Transportation, Inc., 575 U.S. 21 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that "the Eleventh Circuit properly concluded that CSX's competitors are an appropriate comparison class for the Railroad Revitalization and Regulation Reform Act of 1976's subsection (b)(4) claim."[1] The Act prohibits states from imposing "another tax that discriminates against a rail carrier" and the Court found that the Eleventh Circuit "erred in refusing to consider whether Alabama could justify its decision to exempt motor carriers from its sales and use taxes through its decision to subject motor carriers to a fuel excise tax."[2]
Opinion of the Court
[edit]Associate Justice Antonin Scalia authored the Court's 7–2 decision.[1]
See also
[edit]
References
[edit]External links
[edit]- Text of Ala. Dep't of Revenue v. CSX Transp., Inc., 575 U.S. ___ (2015) is available from: Google Scholar Justia Oyez (oral argument audio)
- SCOTUSblog coverage