DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno
| DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno | |
|---|---|
| Argued March 1, 2006 Decided May 15, 2006 | |
| Full case name | DaimlerChrysler Corporation v. Charlotte Cuno, et al. |
| Docket no. | 04-1704 |
| Citations | 547 U.S. 332 (more) 126 S. Ct. 1854; 164 L. Ed. 2d 589; 2006 U.S. LEXIS 3956; 74 U.S.L.W. 4233; 06 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3931; 2006 Daily Journal D.A.R. 5770; 19 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 185 |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Motion to dismiss granted, 154 F. Supp. 2d 1196 (N.D. Ohio 2001); affirmed in part, reversed, 386 F.3d 738 (6th Cir. 2004); rehearing en banc denied, No. 01-3960, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 1750 (6th Cir. January 18, 2005); cert. granted, 545 U.S. 1165 (2006). |
| Holding | |
| State taxpayers do not have standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution to challenge state tax or spending in federal court simply by virtue of their status as taxpayers. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated in part and remanded. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Roberts, joined by Stevens, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Breyer, Alito |
| Concurrence | Ginsburg (in part and in judgment) |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. art. III | |
DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno, 547 U.S. 332 (2006), is a United States Supreme Court case involving the standing of taxpayers to challenge state tax laws in federal court. The Court unanimously ruled that state taxpayers did not have standing under Article III of the United States Constitution to challenge state tax or spending decisions simply by virtue of their status as taxpayers. Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the majority opinion (his fifth on the Court), which was joined by all of the justices except for Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who concurred separately.