3 ms·
>Although the court left open the possibility that other arguments could be pressed against the South Dakota law, Kennedy’s majority opinion strongly suggested
by windows_tips 8y ago
>Although the court left open the possibility that other arguments could be pressed against the South Dakota law, Kennedy’s majority opinion strongly suggested the measure was constitutional, in part because it has the $100,000 threshold and...
Anyone know where the Constitution talks about this $100,000 threshold?
>doesn’t try to impose retroactive taxation.
Similar to how it presumably not limiting what arms can be sold makes it 'constitutional'.
- aerotwelve 8y agoI haven't been able to read the opinion yet, as I'm on a phone, but often these types of thresholds or tests come from related cases that have been previously decided. Natural places to start looking in this case would be the Quill Corp. v. North Dakota or National Bellas Hess Inc. v. Illinois Department of Revenue. (If not there, following the footnotes in Kennedy's opinion will likely get you there eventually.)