| Head Money Cases | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued November 19–20, 1884 Decided December 8, 1884 | |
| Full case name | Edye and Another v. Robertson, Collector; Cunard Steamship Company v. Robertson; Same v. Same |
| Citations | 112U.S.580 (more) 5 S. Ct. 247; 28L. Ed. 798; 1884U.S. LEXIS 1909; 3 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 2473 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | On writs of error from the Circuit Courts of the Eastern and Southern Districts of New York |
| Holding | |
| Treaties do not hold a privileged position above other acts of Congress, and other laws affecting their "enforcement, modification, or repeal" are legitimate. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinion | |
| Majority | Miller, joined unanimously |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. | |
TheHead Money Cases, 112 U.S. 580 (1884), also referred to asEdye v. Robertson, were a group of cases decided together by theUnited States Supreme Court.[1]
Pursuant to theImmigration Act of 1882, officers from thecustomhouse in thePort of New York began collecting a tax from ships of fifty cents for each immigrant aboard. Multiple ship owners sued because they were transporting Dutch immigrants, and theNetherlands had a treaty with the United States that seemed to prohibit the tax.
The case established the precedent thattreaties, which are described in theSupremacy Clause of theUS Constitution as "the supreme law of the land" equal to any domestic federal law, do not hold a privileged position above other acts of Congress. Hence, other laws affecting the "enforcement, modification, or repeal" of treaties are legitimate.[1][2]
Works related toHead Money Cases at Wikisource| Diplomatic posts | |
|---|---|
| Diplomacy | |
| Incidents | |
| Military relations | |
| Related | |
 | This article related to a case of theSupreme Court of the United States of theWaite Court is astub. You can help Wikipedia byexpanding it. |
