United States v. Kahriger
Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.
Status
More on how this was screened
Courts continue to cite its separate holding on Congress's taxing power. The three confirmed treatments are listed below.
60 later cases cite United States v. Kahriger; 60 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.
Relying on United States v. Kahriger?
This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.
Treatments
Overruled in part
-
The Supreme Court overruled Kahriger to the extent it prevented a defendant charged with violating wagering tax registration duties from asserting the Fifth Amendment privilege.
Marchetti v. United States · Supreme Court of the United States · filed
We conclude that nothing in the Court’s opinions in Kahriger and Lewis now suffices to preclude petitioner’s assertion of the constitutional privilege as a defense to the indictments under which he was convicted. To this extent Kahriger and Lewis are overruled.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →
Limited
-
The Supreme Court declined to extend Kahriger's rejection of a Fifth Amendment defense to the wagering excise tax, permitting a privilege claim against criminal punishment for nonpayment.
Grosso v. United States · Supreme Court of the United States · filed
For reasons indicated in Marchetti, supra, we have found nothing in United States v. Kahriger, 345 U. S. 22, or Lewis v. United States, 348 U. S. 419, which now warrants the exclusion of this situation from the privilege’s protection.5 It need only be added that the requirements associated with the excise tax are directed wholly to past and present wagering activities; they lack even the illusory prospectivity which characterizes the special occupational tax and registration requirements.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →
Questioned
-
The Second Circuit said intervening Fifth Amendment authority might cause the Supreme Court to overrule Kahriger's self-incrimination ruling and left the question for that Court.
United States v. Grassia · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · filed
Recognizing that the rationale of Albertson v. Subversive Activities Control Board, 86 S.Ct. 194 (1965), announced subsequent to our Costello opinion, may lead the Supreme Court to overrule its previous decisions in United States v. Kahriger, 345 U.S. 22, 73 S.Ct. 510, 97 L.Ed. 754 (1953), and Lewis v. United States, 348 U.S. 419, 75 S.Ct. 415, 99 L.Ed. 475 (1955), insofar as they sustained the federal wagering statutes against attack on the ground of self-incrimination, we consider that issue more appropriate for that Court’s determination.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →
Does this case still carry your argument?
Describe your facts. Ezel reads United States v. Kahriger and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace