Direct Marketing Ass'n v. Brohl
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 Direct Marketing Ass'n v. Brohl?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
SHOW ALL QUESTIONS
Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl, 575 U.S. 1 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a lawsuit by the Direct Marketing Association trade group about a Colorado law regarding reporting the state's tax requirements to customers and to the Colorado Department of Revenue is not barred by the Tax Injunction Act.[1] While the case was reheard and found in favor of Colorado, the concurrence of Justice Anthony Kennedy provided a means for states to bring a challenge the ruling of Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, which has prevented states from collecting taxes from out-of-state vendors.
Quick Facts Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl, Argued December 8, 2014 Decided March 3, 2015 ...
Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl | |
---|---|
Argued December 8, 2014 Decided March 3, 2015 | |
Full case name | Direct Marketing Association, Petitioner v. Barbara Brohl, Executive Director, Colorado Department of Revenue |
Docket no. | 13-1032 |
Citations | 575 U.S. 1 (more) 135 S. Ct. 1124; 191 L. Ed. 2d 97 |
Case history | |
Prior | Direct Marketing Ass'n v. Huber, No. 1:10-cv-01546, 2012 WL 1079175 (D. Colo. Mar. 30, 2012); remanded sub. nom., Direct Marketing Ass'n v. Brohl, 735 F.3d 904 (10th Cir. 2013); cert. granted, 134 S. Ct. 2901 (2014). |
Subsequent | On remand, 814 F.3d 1129 (10th Cir. 2016); cert. denied, 137 S. Ct. 591 (2016). |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Thomas, joined by unanimous |
Concurrence | Kennedy |
Concurrence | Ginsburg, joined by Breyer; Sotomayor (in part) |
Laws applied | |
Tax Injunction Act, Dormant Commerce Clause |
Close