GOLDBERG ET AL.
v.
SWEET, DIRECTOR, ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, ET AL.; AND GTE SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS CORP. V. SWEET, DIRECTOR, ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, ET AL.
GOLDBERG ET AL.
SWEET, DIRECTOR, ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, ET AL.; AND GTE SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS CORP. V. SWEET, DIRECTOR, ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, ET AL.
484 U.S. 1057
Supreme Court of the United States (1988)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (U.S. 1988)
-
Goldberg v. Sweet, 488 U.S. 252 (U.S. 1989)…1267. Having found that the Tax Act satisfied the requirements of Complete Auto, the Illinois Supreme Court concluded that it did not violate the Commerce Clause. Sprint, Goldberg, and McTigue appealed to this Court. We noted probable jurisdiction, 484 U. S. 1057 (1988), and now affirm. II A This Court has frequently had occasion to consider whether state taxes violate the Commerce Clause. The wavering doctrinal lines of our pre-Complete Auto cases reflect the tension between two competing concepts: the v…