October Term 2018 · Docket 17-419
Does West Virginia tax federal retiree pensions differently than state ones?
Federal marshals argue West Virginia taxes their pensions while exempting state workers. The state claims the tax is legal.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Rosenberg argued the tax violates Section 111. He stated it discriminates based on compensation source. He said only state plans receive the exemption.
Ms. See argued the taxpayer must show different treatment. She cited the Jefferson County decision. She emphasized the need for similar state employee comparison.
Mr. Huston agreed the tax is facially discriminatory. He stated this is the critical feature. He addressed questions about state employee categories.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 55-19 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 55-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 25-33 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 25-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 47-7 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 47-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 31-53 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 31-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 55-39 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 55-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-47 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 49-11 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 49-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 15-17 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 15-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 53-9 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 53-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 29-53 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 29-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 55-31 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 55-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 13-33 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 13-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 55-55 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 55-55
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 43-7 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 43-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 72, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 72, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 53-55 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 53-55
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 7-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 7-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 35-49 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 35-49
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
West Virginia taxes pensions from federal retirement plans. It exempts pensions from state plans. Federal marshals say this violates federal law. The state says the tax is fair.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 31-53 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 31-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 55-39 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 55-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-47 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 55-31 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 55-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 43-7 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 43-7
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on December 3, 2018.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 53-55 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 53-55
What each side wants
the sides that brought the case want the Court to strike down the tax. They argue it discriminates against federal workers.
the opposing sides want the Court to uphold the tax. They argue the state can tax federal pensions.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 31-53 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 31-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 55-39 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 55-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-47 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 55-31 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 55-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 43-7 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 43-7
What each side says
the sides that brought the case argue the tax facially discriminates based on compensation source. They cite precedent requiring equal treatment for similar employees.
the opposing sides argue the tax is not discriminatory. They claim federal and state workers are not similarly situated.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 31-53 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 31-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 55-39 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 55-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-47 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 55-31 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 55-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 43-7 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 43-7
What the justices asked
Justice Sotomayor asked how to identify overlapping job duties. She noted marshals overlap with lower-tax and higher-tax state agents.
Chief Justice Roberts asked if the marshal's job is administrative. He asked if retirement money comes from marshal time. He asked if the Attorney General qualifies as law enforcement.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 55-19 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 55-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 25-33 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 25-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 47-7 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 47-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 49-11 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 49-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 15-17 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 15-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 53-9 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 53-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 29-53 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 29-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 13-33 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 13-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 55-55 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 55-55
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 72, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 72, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 53-55 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 53-55
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 7-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 7-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 35-49 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 35-49
Why it matters
This case determines if states can tax federal retiree pensions differently. It affects the financial treatment of federal employees. It clarifies the scope of intergovernmental tax immunity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 31-53 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 31-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 55-39 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 55-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-47 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 55-31 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 55-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 43-7 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 43-7
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 55-19 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 55-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 25-33 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 25-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 47-7 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 47-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 49-11 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 49-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 15-17 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 15-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 53-9 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 53-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 29-53 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 29-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 13-33 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 13-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 55-55 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 55-55
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 72, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 72, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 53-55 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 53-55
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 7-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 7-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 35-49 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 35-49
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 31-53 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 31-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 55-39 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 55-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-47 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 55-31 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 55-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 43-7 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 43-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 31-53 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 31-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 55-39 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 55-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-47 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 55-31 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 55-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 43-7 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 43-7
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.