Summary

Joseph McKenna Bankers' Trust Company v. Blodgett…

There was no debt owed by decedent, (2) no action under the statute arose against her; (3) no penalty had been incurred by her because as long as she lived the statute was inapplicable to her; (4) it is not a tax for its primary object is punishment, not revenue.
The assertions are unjustified. There was an evasion of duty by decedent, and the obligation she incurred, and should have discharged, w § imposed upon her estate, and legally imposed, for out of her estate it can only be discharged. The payment of taxes is an obvious and insistent duty, and its sanction is usually punitive.
Source: Wikisource

Joseph McKenna Bankers' Trust Company v. Blodgett…

The contention is untenable. The penalty of the statute was not in punishment of a crime, and it is only to such that the constitutional prohibition applies. It has no relation to retrospective legislation of any other description. Johannessen v. United States, 225 U.S. 227, 242, 32 Sup. Ct. 613, 56 L. Ed. 1066.
The final contention of plaintiffs in error is that the statute can only be sustained on the assumption that 'in the last analysis the property of deceased persons belongs to the state.'
The contention is extreme.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature