United States Shoe Corporation v. United States
United States Court of International Trade
907 F. Supp. 408 (1995)
- Written by Gonzalo Rodriguez, JD
Facts
United States Shoe Corporation (Shoe) (plaintiff) sued the United States Customs Service (customs) (defendant) arguing that the Harbor Maintenance Tax (HMT) violated the Export Clause of the United States Constitution. The HMT imposed an ad valorem tax on imports brought through a port. Because the tax was fixed by law and was based on the value of the imports, customs’ role was limited to the ministerial administration of the scheme. Although both Shoe and customs agreed that the United States Court of International Trade has jurisdiction to review the constitutionality of the HMT, they disagreed as to the source of that jurisdiction. Customs argued that the court’s jurisdiction arose under 28 U.S.C. § 1851(a), while Shoe argued that the court’s jurisdiction arose from § 1851(i). Customs argued that the challenge could not arise under § 1581(i) because the HMT applied to exports, not imports. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (DiCarlo. C.J.)
Concurrence (Musgrave, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 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.