Leathers v. Medlock

499 U.S. 439 (1991)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
L
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Leathers v. Medlock

United States Supreme Court
499 U.S. 439 (1991)

Facts

Arkansas’s Gross Receipts Act imposed a 4 percent tax generally applicable to receipts from the sale of personal property and services. Certain sales of goods and services were identified as exempt, including receipts from newspapers and magazines. Before 1987, neither cable television nor satellite television were subject to taxation. In 1987 Arkansas passed Act 188, which amended the Gross Receipts Act to impose taxes on cable television. This expansion subjected approximately 100 cable suppliers to the sales tax. Cable-television subscriber Daniel Medlock, cable-television operator Community Communications Co., and cable trade organization Arkansas Cable Television Association, Inc. (collectively, the cable-television representatives) (plaintiffs) filed a class-action suit in Arkansas state court challenging Act 188, arguing that it was unconstitutional to impose a sales tax on cable television while exempting or excluding satellite television, newspapers, and magazines. The court found that Act 188 was constitutional, and the cable-television representatives appealed. The Arkansas Supreme Court reversed, holding that cable and satellite television were part of the same medium and under the First Amendment a tax scheme could not subject members of the same medium to different taxes. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (O’Connor, J.)

Dissent (Marshall, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 806,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

First Amendment
Media Law

Key Terms