Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Franchise Tax Board of California et al. v. United Americans for Public Schools et al., 1974 — 419 U.S. 890 · caselaw · US
Tax
Franchise Tax Board of California et al. v. United Americans for Public Schools et al.
419 U.S. 890·Supreme Court of the United States·1974
joined by The Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Rehnquist,
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
No. 73-1718.
Franchise Tax Board of California et al. v. United Americans for Public Schools et al.
[MAJORITY]
Affirmed on appeal from D. C. N. D. Cal.
[DISSENT — Mr. Justice White,]
Mr. Justice White,
joined by The Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Rehnquist,
dissenting.
The District Court struck down the California statute providing state income-tax reductions for taxpayers sending their children to nonpublic schools. The Court summarily affirms this judgment. For the reasons stated in my dissent in Committee for Public Education & Religious Liberty v. Nyquist, 413 U. S. 756, 813-824 (1973), I disagree and respectfully dissent.