Summary

by John Marshall Harlan O'Neil v. State of Vermont/Dissent Harlan…

The decision that the sales were consummated in Vermont, and, consequently, that the defendant violated the laws of that state, in doing what he did there, by his agents, is not, in itself, sufficient to support the judgment, except upon the theory that he had no right, under the constitution of the United States, to send the liquors into Vermont to be there delivered in the original packages.
Source: Wikisource

by John Marshall Harlan O'Neil v. State of Vermont/Dissent Harlan…

We have often held that a judgment of the highest court of the state which failed to recognize a federal right, specially set up and claimed, ought not to be disturbed, unless its necessary effect was to deny that right, or where it proceeded in part upon another and distinct ground, not involving a federal question, but sufficient, in itself, to maintain the judgment without reference to that question.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature