Stanley Forman Reed,
United States v. Burnison — Opinion of the Court
“ The argument is that even if the Supremacy Clause would not be violated if the statute provided that no governmental body could be made the beneficiary of a California will, there is a violation of the Supremacy Clause when the United States is treated less advantageously than California. ”
Stanley Forman Reed,
United States v. Burnison — Opinion of the Court
“ But the United States' capacity to receive, even though called a 'right' or a 'power,' is not a 'law of the state.' As we have shown in the earlier discussion, that capacity cannot be magically transformed into something that must be enforced. ”
Stanley Forman Reed,
United States v. Burnison — Opinion of the Court
“ In asking us to overrule the Fox case, the United States contends that since it has the power to accept testamentary gifts, the Supremacy Clause bars a state from stopping this stream of federal revenue at its source. The argument is that every authorized activity of the United States represents an exercise of its governmental power, [6] and that therefore the power to receive property through a will is a governmental power. ”
