DeLima v. Bidwell | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Supreme Court of the United States |
||||||
Argued January 8–11, 1901 Decided May 27, 1901 |
||||||
Full case name | Elias S.A. DeLima, et al., plaintiffs in error, v. George R. Bidwell | |||||
Holding | ||||||
Upon ratification of the Treaty of Paris, Puerto Rico was not a foreign country for purposes of the tariff laws of the United States, which required payment of duties on goods moving into the United States from a foreign country. | ||||||
Court membership | ||||||
|
||||||
Case opinions | ||||||
Majority | Brown, joined by Fuller, Harlan, Peckham, Brewer | |||||
Dissent | McKenna, joined by Shiras, White | |||||
Dissent | Gray |
DeLima v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 1 (1901), was one of a group of the first Insular Cases decided by the United States Supreme Court.
The case was argued on January 8-11, 1901 and was decided on May 27, 1901.
The DeLima Sugar Importing Company sued the New York City collector of customs to recover duties on sugar imported from Puerto Rico after 1899, when Puerto Rico was ceded to the United States. DeLima argued that The Port of New York City had no jurisdiction to collect duties because Puerto Rico was annexed by the United States.
Contents |
The lower appellate court had held:
The Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision ruled that Puerto Rico after its cession to the United States in 1898 following the Treaty of Paris was not a foreign country for purposes of the tariff laws of the United States, which required payment of duties on goods moving into the United States from a foreign country. In the absence of congressional legislation, the United States Government could not collect customs duties on sugar from Puerto Rico shipped to other parts of the United States by classifying Puerto Rico as a foreign country.[1]
The majority opinion was authored by Henry Billings Brown, joined by Melville Fuller, John Marshall Harlan, Rufus Wheeler Peckham and David Josiah Brewer. Justice Joseph McKenna authored a dissent, which was joined by George Shiras, Jr., and Edward Douglass White. Justice Horace Gray authored a separate dissenting opinion. The decision is similar to Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901) decided on the same date.