Alabama Department of Revenue v. CSX Transportation, Inc.
2015 United States Supreme Court case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Alabama Department of Revenue v. CSX Transportation, Inc.?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
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]
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 |