UNITED STATES V. CRAFT (00-1831) 535 U.S. 274 (2002)
233 F.3d 358, reversed and remanded.
Syllabus
Opinion
[ O’Connor ]
Dissent
[ Scalia ]
Dissent
[ Thomas ]
HTML version
PDF version
HTML version
PDF version
HTML version
PDF version
HTML version
PDF version

535 U.S. ____ (2002)

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES


No. 00—1831

UNITED STATES, PETITIONER v. SANDRA L. CRAFT

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

[April 17, 2002]

Justice Scalia, with whom Justice Thomas joins, dissenting.

I join Justice Thomas’s dissent, which points out (to no relevant response from the Court) that a State’s decision to treat the marital partnership as a separate legal entity, whose property cannot be encumbered by the debts of its individual members, is no more novel and no more “artificial” than a State’s decision to treat the commercial partnership as a separate legal entity, whose property cannot be encumbered by the debts of its individual members.

I write separately to observe that the Court nullifies (insofar as federal taxes are concerned, at least) a form of property ownership that was of particular benefit to the stay-at-home spouse or mother. She is overwhelmingly likely to be the survivor that obtains title to the unencumbered property; and she (as opposed to her business-world husband) is overwhelmingly unlikely to be the source of the individual indebtedness against which a tenancy by the entirety protects. It is regrettable that the Court has eliminated a large part of this traditional protection retained by many States.