Thread by @jedshug

Wealth Tax's Constitutionality?
I've been skeptical, so I was re-reading Hylton v. U.S. (1796) upholding a carriage tax.
Justice Chase's dicta at 3 U.S. 175 is strong evidence in favor of its constitutionality, and I think it has been overlooked in the public debate.
1/

2/ Chase:
"I am inclined to think, but of this I do not give a judicial opinion, that the direct taxes contemplated by the Constitution, are only two, to wit, a capitation, or poll tax, simply, without regard to property, profession, or any other circumstance; & a tax on LAND..."

3/ Chase, continued:
"I doubt whether a tax, by a general assessment of personal property, within the United States, is included within the term direct tax."

Thus Chase thought a wealth tax would not run afoul of the direct tax/apportionment rule in Art. I, Sec 9, cl 4.

4/ To their credit, @dawnjohnsen & @walterdellinger cited this passage deep in their 2018 Indiana article (linked here), but didn't quote it in their recent @washingtonpost op-ed.
Wealth tax proponents would want to spotlight it, I'd think.
repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewconten…

@dawnjohnsen @walterdellinger @washingtonpost 5/ On the other hand, @rebeccakysar & @DanielJHemel in @nytopinion seem to have more evidence from the Founding Era against a wealth tax, including Hamilton (Federalist 36, his briefs in Hylton) and John Marshall in 1788 Va. Ratifying Convention:
nytimes.com/2019/11/07/opi…

@dawnjohnsen @walterdellinger @washingtonpost @rebeccakysar @DanielJHemel @nytopinion 6/ From @rebeccakysar & @DanielJHemel, it seems more Founding era evidence weighs against the wealth tax (though I'd be careful about reading Hamilton's strategic brief too broadly).
The question is how much evidence is sufficient to establish a clear original public meaning...