California te̍k-hú keng-êng-sòe úi-oân-hōe sò͘ Hyatt àn (2019)
California ti̍k-hú king-îng-suè uí-uân-huē soo Hyatt àn (2019) (Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt (short: Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Hyatt or Hyatt III))[1], 587 U.S. ___ (2019), sī Bí-kok tsuè-ko huat-īnn ê tsi̍t-ê àn-kiānn, tsit-ê àn-kiānn khak-tīng tû-hui in tông-ì, kok-ka hiáng-iú tsú-kuân hat-bián-kuân, ē-tàng bián-tû teh līng-guā tsi̍t-ê tsiu ê huat-īnn tuì-in thê-khí su-jîn ê sòo-siōng. Tsit-ê 5 pí 4 ê kuat-tīng thui-huan 1979-nî tsuè-ko huat-īnn àn-kiānn tang-tiong khak-li̍p ê sian-lē, tsik sī Nevada sòo Hall àn (Nevada v. Hall). Tse sī sòo-siōng tong-sū-jîn tē-3 pái hiòng huat-īnn the̍h-kau àn-kiānn, in-uī huat-īnn í-king tī 2003-nî hām 2016-nî tō tuì tsit-ê būn-tê tsò-tshut tshâi-kuat.
| California te̍k-hú keng-êng-sòe úi-oân-hōe sò͘ Hyatt àn (2019) | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued January 9, 2019 Decided May 13, 2019 | |
| Full case name | Franchise Tax Board of California, Petitioner v. Gilbert P. Hyatt |
| Citations | 587 U.S. ___ (more) |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Decision | Opinion |
| Case history | |
| Prior |
|
| Holding | |
| States have sovereign immunity from private suits against them in courts of other states without their consent. Judgement of the Nevada Supreme Court reversed and remanded. | |
| Court membership | |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Thomas, joined by Roberts, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh |
| Dissent | Breyer, joined by Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. Amend. XI | |
|
This case overturned a previous ruling or rulings | |
| Nevada sòo Hall àn (1979) | |
Tsit-ê tshâi-kuat kiat-sok Hyatt hām California tsi-kan iú-kuan Hyatt sia̍p-hiâm suè-bū khi-tsà ê tn̂g-kî suè-bū kiù-hun. Hyatt it-ti̍t teh tsit-gî California ti̍k-hú king-îng suè-bū uí-guân-huē ("FTB") uì 1993-nî í-lâi thong-kuè huat-tîng hām hîng-tsìng sòo-siōng iau-kiû Hyatt tsi-hù ê suè-bū tsà-khi tshú-hua̍t. Iû-î tsuè-ko huat-īnn ê tshâi-kuat, Hyatt hông iau-kiû tsi-hù i sóo sán-sing ê sóo-ū ê huat-lu̍t huì-iōng, lî-tshiánn pīng-bô siu--tio̍h tsiam-tuì FTB ê phuànn-kuat. Teh tsit-ê àn-kiānn tíng-kuân, Clarence Thomas tāi-huat-kuann án-ne siá: "Tuì huat-bîng-lâng lâi-kóng, hiō-kó tio̍h-sī i tio̍h-beh sún-sit 20-nî ê sòo-siōng huì-iōng, pīng in-uī i-ê ok-lua̍t ê hîng-uî jî-lâi tuì táng-sū-huē tsò-tshut tsue-tsiong ê phuànn-kuat……tsia--ê kū-thé àn-kiānn ê huì-iōng sī sio̍k-ú ē-lâi suè-ho̍k lán kian-tshî í tshò-ngōo hong-sik lâi kái-kuat tiōng-iàu hiàn-huat būn-tê ê i-lāi lī-ik".
Tshî huán-tuì ì-kiàn ê Stephen Breyer tāi-huat-kuann kíng-kò kóng, tuā-to-sòo ê lâng guān-ì thui-huan sian-lē; i kóng: "Thui-huan tshiūnn Hall tsi̍t-khuànn ê ha̍p-lí kuat-tīng……ē tì-sú kong-tsiòng lú-lâi lú bô khak-tīng huat-īnn tio̍h-beh hóo-tīng tá tsi̍t-kuá-á àn-kiānn, í-ki̍p tá tsi̍t-kuá-á àn-kiānn tio̍h ū huat-tōo kè-sio̍k tsûn-tsāi", pīng-í Planned Parenthood sòo Casey àn (Planned Parenthood v. Casey) uî-lē, tse sī tsi̍t-ê huat-sing tī 1992-nî ê àn-kiānn; khak-jīn kū-iú lí-thîng-pi ì-gī ê tuī-thai-kuân ê àn-kiānn Roe sòo Wade àn (Roe v. Wade). Iû-ú tsit-hāng tshâi-kuat, Gilbert Hyatt pīng-bô uì California hi̍k-tit 100,000 bí-kim ê puê-siông-kim. Sui-bóng Nevada tsiu ê puê-sím-thuân siōng-thâu-áphuànn hōo i 3.89 ik bí-kim ê puê-siông-kim, m̄-kù Nevada tsiu tsuè-ko huat-īnn hām Bí-kok tsuè-ko huat-īnn ê tshâi-kuat kā puê-siông-kim kiám-kàu 10 bān-khoo bí-kim.
Tsù-kái
siu-kái- ↑ Leading Case, Franchise Tax Board v. Hyatt[1] Archived 2020-03-22 at the Wayback Machine., 133 Harv. L. Rev. 362, 362 (Nov. 8, 2019). (Eng-gí)
Ên-sin ua̍t-to̍k
siu-kái- List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 587 (Eng-gí)
- Hans v. Louisiana, a decision which re-affirmed state immunity in federal courts (Eng-gí)
- Janus v. AFSCME (2018), a case in which the liberal minority of the Supreme Court questioned the willingness of the conservative majority of the Supreme Court to ignore long-standing precedent and to overturn past rulings/to overrule precedent (Eng-gí)
- Knick v. Township of Scott, Pennsylvania (2019), another case in which the liberal minority of the Supreme Court questioned the willingness of the conservative majority of the Supreme Court to ignore long-standing precedent and to overturn past rulings/to overrule precedents (Eng-gí)
Tsham-ua̍t
siu-kái- List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 587
- Hans v. Louisiana, a decision which re-affirmed state immunity in federal courts
- Janus v. AFSCME (2018), a case in which the liberal minority of the Supreme Court questioned the willingness of the conservative majority of the Supreme Court to ignore long-standing precedent and to overturn past rulings/to overrule precedent
- Knick v. Township of Scott, Pennsylvania (2019), another case in which the liberal minority of the Supreme Court questioned the willingness of the conservative majority of the Supreme Court to ignore long-standing precedent and to overturn past rulings/to overrule precedents
- Nevada sòo Hall àn (Nevada v. Hall)
Guā-pōo liân-kiat
siu-kái- Text of Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, 587 U.S. ___ (2019) is available from: Justia Oyez (oral argument audio) Supreme Court (slip opinion) (Eng-gí)