State Of New York et al v. Mnuchin et al
Filing
47
DECLARATION of Owen T. Conroy in Support re: 44 CROSS MOTION for Summary Judgment .. Document filed by State Of Connecticut, State Of New York, State of Maryland, State of New Jersey. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8, # 9 Exhibit 9, # 10 Exhibit 10, # 11 Exhibit 11, # 12 Exhibit 12, # 13 Exhibit 13, # 14 Exhibit 14, # 15 Exhibit 15, # 16 Exhibit 16, # 17 Exhibit 17, # 18 Exhibit 18, # 19 Exhibit 19, # 20 Exhibit 20, # 21 Exhibit 21, # 22 Exhibit 22, # 23 Exhibit 23, # 24 Exhibit 24, # 25 Exhibit 25, # 26 Exhibit 26, # 27 Exhibit 27, # 28 Exhibit 28, # 29 Exhibit 29, # 30 Exhibit 30, # 31 Exhibit 31, # 32 Exhibit 32, # 33 Exhibit 33, # 34 Exhibit 34, # 35 Exhibit 35, # 36 Exhibit 36, # 37 Exhibit 37, # 38 Exhibit 38, # 39 Exhibit 39, # 40 Exhibit 40, # 41 Exhibit 41, # 42 Exhibit 42, # 43 Exhibit 43, # 44 Exhibit 44, # 45 Exhibit 45, # 46 Exhibit 46, # 47 Exhibit 47, # 48 Exhibit 48, # 49 Exhibit 49, # 50 Exhibit 50, # 51 Exhibit 51, # 52 Exhibit 52, # 53 Exhibit 53, # 54 Exhibit 54, # 55 Exhibit 55, # 56 Exhibit 56, # 57 Exhibit 57, # 58 Exhibit 58, # 59 Exhibit 59, # 60 Exhibit 60, # 61 Exhibit 61, # 62 Exhibit 62, # 63 Exhibit 63, # 64 Exhibit 64, # 65 Exhibit 65, # 66 Exhibit 66, # 67 Exhibit 67, # 68 Exhibit 68, # 69 Exhibit 69, # 70 Exhibit 70, # 71 Exhibit 71, # 72 Exhibit 72, # 73 Exhibit 73, # 74 Exhibit 74, # 75 Exhibit 75, # 76 Exhibit 76, # 77 Exhibit 77, # 78 Exhibit 78, # 79 Exhibit 79, # 80 Exhibit 80, # 81 Exhibit 81, # 82 Exhibit 82, # 83 Exhibit 83, # 84 Exhibit 84, # 85 Exhibit 85, # 86 Exhibit 86, # 87 Exhibit 87, # 88 Exhibit 88, # 89 Exhibit 89, # 90 Exhibit 90, # 91 Exhibit 91, # 92 Exhibit 92, # 93 Exhibit 93, # 94 Exhibit 94, # 95 Exhibit 95, # 96 Exhibit 96, # 97 Exhibit 97, # 98 Exhibit 98, # 99 Exhibit 99, # 100 Exhibit 100, # 101 Exhibit 101, # 102 Exhibit 102, # 103 Exhibit 103, # 104 Exhibit 104, # 105 Exhibit 105, # 106 Exhibit 106)(Conroy, Owen)
Exhibit 15
HUGHES IS AGAINST INCOME AMENDMENT: Tells Legislature it Gives ...
Special to The New York Times.CHARLES E. HUGHES.
New York Times (1857-1922); Jan 6, 1910; ProQuest Historical Newspapers: The New York Times
pg. 2
HUGHES Is .AGAINST
INCOME AMENDMENT ,
.
·.
I
!I
. t
T e II S L eg1s Ia_ure "t a·IVes
I
Government Powe; to
stat e · an d
M
· ·
l
Federal;
i
i
1
n
•
.
1
WOULD IMPAIR STATE CREDI T•
;
I
'
Governor Favor:; Federal Power to Tax
'I
I
stitutional Change Propose d •
l!,
10
1'1rc
I
I
Yor): Ti,.:cs.
I
I
I
I
!
_y,,_
...
I
I
I
1
src.-ial
I
II
!
Incomes, but Not Sweeping Con·
I
:
I
!'
1
the Constitution· itself. which, if ratified.' Pollock case diffet·ed in oplnlon upon the
wiil Ce in effect a grnnt to the Federal f;'l£stion whether a tax upon h1como from
Go\·ernment of the power which it defines. prcperty was a direct tnx and as sue:h
The· comprehensive words. "from what- could not be laid without apportionment,
ever source derived." if taken in their they were unanimous in their conclusl'on
natural sense, would include not onlv· in- that no Federal tax could be laid upon
comes from ordinary real or personal the _income from municipal bonds. l\fr.
, uroperty, but also lncomei; derl\·ed from J11st1ce 'Vhlte, who dissented in the PolState and tnunicipal. securities.
1>,
lock cas<> with r<->•rnrd to other riuestions
It may bi:! l!rged that the an:1endment I as to this said, (f:i1 u. s. on p. 6:i2;)
·
would. be hm1ted by construction. But 1
Tl
th I I
It
dec1~1"~uot~hi~":ugsti~n. 1 n-r~~; ~f~n,!g1r;,\'!~~
1tl1Ere. can be no sat,isfactory assural'!ce
~ ~f th~s. The words in termi< art; all _mto one case and not to the othc·r. because In
'Uch terms aR to afford the oppol'tunit~·
ls no P·>wer whatever In the Federal GO\·1 ei:-nment, and. therefore the !e,•y, whether
for Fedeo-al action jn violation or the I
rumlamental conditior::; of State authorJt.y.
d•re<'t or lndireC't, Is beyond 'the taxing
I an1 not now referrlng.).o the advantag·~
power.
-'
which the States might derive from the I Jt is cer.tainly/slgnificant that the words.
exdush·e power to tax incon1es from prop- "from whatever source derh·er of the. Federal Government.·
''rumPnL ln order that a market may be The 1mnu1nity from Federal taxation that
p1·0vid,,:d for State bonds, and for munici- 1 the State· n.ncl Its Instrumentalities of go\·pai bon<. nn canll'Ot suppose that Congress will
«S to wake the performance of the fun<'not seek to tax incomes " of local Go\•ernment a matter or s~curit~es issued by the State and its muFederal grace.
.
mcipalttles. It has repeateral GO\·ernment from taxin.F the . ers 1n order that It may perform Its Nain<-an" and instrumentalities of the StiitNl, ; t_lo_nal function. we must be l'qually soI nor is th""" any prohlblt_ln:: th<> State" from I hc1tom; to secure the essential bases or
taxlni:- the m<'ans and m~trume11talltle;1 ~r
State Go\'ernment.
I that Go,·<>rnnwnt. ln both C'aSl"S th<> exI therefore dei:>m It niv dutv ai; Gov~
: emotion n·st~ upon neces~ary lmpil<'atiun.
ernor of the State to recommend· tl'iat this
•
.
•
I
b,· the ::reat law
I ani.l 1~ upheld as. any Gove>rnment,oc· ,,,,1(. I J1!0110set1 amendment Sl!OUl<1 no! b~· ratprl"ser.\'atlon:
whose
I m1>ans <'mployNI in .. omluctlni: Its opPra, tfied.
CHART~ES E. HlJGHES.
tinns If sublec-t to the control of another I
antl distinct ·Go,·ernnicnt. cnn exist nnly at j
I
Tax 1·
I Bo ds
\:
un1c1pa
,
A LBA:XY. Jan. :..-The joint resolution,
passed b~- Con;;n·"" and submitted to th.;,
i.-arious State J.e:;dslatures for ratifica-:
tion. which pro\·hk" for an amendment I
1
to the Constitution of the l"nitcd State>'
gh·ing the Fedt:'ral Go,·ernment power ~o
le,...-'.· tax('s ,, 11 inconws without aopor- ,I
tion1nent among- the States, ·was made the
!=Uhject of a spel'ial lll•!!'>'age which Gov.
Hu::rhe" !'rnt to t llf' Legh,lature at .its j'
opening >'quarely again;;t,
th e rr~::u 1u t'm n ,;ane 1· 1 ecJ ti· the Pre·' i
10 1
)·
,.,c'lent. on th·" grountl that the proposed 1
am<'ndemnt as lfla!'sed by Congress woul•I I
render State hontls or tho:;e i!~sUed hy;
munidpalilie,; l"uhj<'<:'t to Federal taxa'l.ion. )
~~-':.1111;.';!:'~h:!.., ;~~:!n.?~t';,".;'o'r~~:·po~~r ~~~":)~
•. To nlace the hf)rrowing capacity "f '
'
tax them al discretion?
Tn
\'F<.
Farmers'
th., Stat.,. and or 'its go\'ernmental agenI Lean th~ case of Pollock <1:11. r.r. _s., on
aml Trust company.
cie!< at ~he.' m .. rey of the Federal taxing,
, pp. r.84-:>,) Chief .Tnstic<" F~ller said, rE>- :
power would be an impairment· of the e,;- I .,00 for such . a discrimination has been
ri:rrin? to the tax urmi;i, . J11{•oa1ei< froi;~ I
sential rights of the State,. which. ~s lLS
or "an ?" sui;-~ested. Hd •• P._ 680.)
j~~~J~.:fc al bonds. one or_ t..C; matters. the.1" !
offfcers. we are houn ins1r11- 1
.• 1 ,•
~ •
r o 11ows.
•
..
•
- '1\1 IOU ap-. mentalitH?s of the R~ate Gon·rnmcnt, It
Tl ie speci:i mrssa,,e Is as
ponionment among !he States :-_ccordingl was Joni!' a~o determined that the property
To the Leg-1l'lalure:
.
! ~o P?i>ulat1or.. I bethe;·e that this power nn· the FC;dera) Go,·ernmenl
~ubj"c~s <•t?
rn~:at!cn.
• •
, .
.. ·
j so as pr!J):'erly to equip 1t with the n1e:i.11s not th<' J>ropert~· Fes /1
nut we t111nl' the same
nf pow..r to
State of the I . mte- 001 .J
,·
-·
action as rn;i.~ be had thereon.
"olf or fho'-'e i "U d b. l\f.
.. .
Thc>:e uonds nml securltle" are ai; Im- 1
'
·
•
~
s. e
:li
un1e1pa! Gov- 1 portnn< to the performance of the duties of
'The Propot1ed Amendmen't.
e1·nm2nts org-anizeJ under the State's au-• the State as like bonds and securities or the I
d
od b Y tl. Join t th 01 lt. • T o P 1ace t h e borrowing capacity
- .
.
l•nited States al'e Important to the per· I
Th e amen ment propos_
lls
~
formancc or their duties, and are as exempt· :
resolution, adopted b~· two-third~ of both or ·he State and ot" its go\·ernmental
from · In the case of Pollock'°"' Farm- ernment shall have the power to la...- and
Jlghtlv they may be taxed.hea\'ily; If justly,
ers' ·Locan and Trust company. n:.:s u. s. cvikct tax<:s on incomes •• from whatever
oppre~"!ve1y: Their opcrat}on may be Im601,) the United States Supreme court sour<,:e derived."
pe. judgment of the majorit~·
·of it" m<'mbers and left the quel!tion of
the ad.-isabi111Y of conferring- such a -power upon the Federal Go,·ernment to be
·de•errninc·d in the constitutional method.
'T'he limitations so placed upon the Fed<::ral taxin!?' power arc .thus. describe".l ;by
:!\fr. Just11:-e Harlan 1n 111s d1ssentmg
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
""
i
!
I
l
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
'1
1
I
0
"
I
'
I
I
I
l
I
I'
i&:nt
I
I
I11 1
opinion:
.\ny
.
·
att .. rnpt upon the riarl of Congress
:it,?l~1rti6n n1nCJnt: tlle :;.::;:tatrs.. 'l!!>On the
b~s1·:; ~in1U1y or thC'ir population, taxation
or n~ ... ~t,),::J,] propcrt~· or
in<.,-ornes,. wou1d
t'•nd !o ai·n:.:;se such indi~nation a.n1on:: the
tn
or
frt.·e:11rn (lf ;\.111erh:a that 1t 'vouUl never
br r"'n"a t~d.
"•h<·n. therefon;. this court
at:1jud,e;f's. a~ it docs no't\~ aCljud;.:;"e,. that
C!ein;;-u"(Os <.•annJL in1pose a duo· or tax upon
y:er;vn.il p1·onerty. or upon income arising
either fN:n 1·cnls of re:tl estate or from,
p1·r.so11al P'""-'!·<"'r:s. ;ncludlng in\·ested 11er-
f"Ollc::!'J propP.t-lY~ hand~. stoPk~ and in,~est
m<"nl~ .,r all kind". P:>:cept by apportioning
th~ su1n to be ~o l-aist!d a1nong the States
a!."conJh1~ to population. it vr:ict kally de· c:Ge.s
that .. without an amendment Qf the
<:'"'-"!1H:ft::•!.!on-t:wo-thirds of both House.c:;
o- • ·,:m:.:rP!!!i a.nc! thre'-•-fourths of t!:'e States
r.-nc-u•l!nc;--suc-h property and incoi.:es can
r.'•'\'' r
• J ·t!:.
t-t!'
t-':'
111:ttle to 1•ontribute to thH sup-'
H1e
Xat!onal
r·· . ,,1_ ::.) • • •
Government.
(id .•
1nc-ona·s ar.tsinr; ·from tradei. employ11:• nt "· ealllnzs. and - vrofessions can be
1 '.)t'"••l
ltnder thP rule of unlformit,.. or
- 141t.:mJi:.r. 'by both the .:-.;at!onal Go\·ern-:1-:lf::nt anil the rf'sr>eeth~e State governr.~ent~. "·.;hile- incomt.•s fron1 property. bonds.
Et