Constitutional or Federal prohibition on petroleum

From the 2024 DOR Tax Exemption Study

Det. No.13-0278, 33 WTD 472 (September 30, 2014) 479 Problematic to Taxpayer’s argument is the fact that in Hudson v. U.S., 522 U.S. 93, 118 S.Ct. 488 (1997) the Supreme Court effectively overruled its decision in Halper, stating: The [Double Jeopardy] Clause protects only against the imposition of multiple criminal punishments for the same offense. . . * * * Our opinion in United States v. Halper marked the first time we applied the Double Jeopardy Clause to a sanction without first determining that it was criminal in nature. Hudson, 522 U.S. 93, 99-100 (brackets added). In Hudson, the Court explained that its decision in Halper deviated from its traditional double jeopardy analysis in two key respects, and admitted that it was ill considered: The analysis applied by the Halper Court deviated from our traditional double jeopardy doctrine in two key respects. First, the Halper Court bypassed the threshold question: whether the successive punishment at issue is a “criminal” punishment. Instead, it focused on whether the sanction, regardless of whether it was civil or criminal, was so grossly disproportionate to the harm caused as to constitute “punishment.” In so doing, the Court el