West Virginia law exempts from state taxation the pension benefits of certain former state law enforcement employees, but does not afford the same exemption to former federal employees. Dawson brought suit alleging that the West Virginia statute violated the inter-governmental tax immunity doctrine codified at 4 U.S.C. §111, under which the United States has only consented to state taxation if the “taxation does not discriminate against the officer or employee because of the source of the pay or compensation.” The West Virginia trial court found that there were no significant differences between Dawson’s powers and duties as a U.S. Marshall and those of the state and local law enforcement officers West Virginia exempted, and that the West Virginia law was prohibited under §111.

The Court determined that the tax scheme violates 4 USC § 111, which bars discriminatory taxation of federal officers and employees.A lawsuit to challenge the differential tax treatment was brought by a retired U.S. Marshall living in West Virginia, who could not claim the exemption from retirement benefit income offered to West Virginia police, firefighters, and deputy sheriffs. See W. Va. Code Ann. § 11-21-12(c)(6).

A retired US marshal living in West Virginia challenged the differential treatment under the doctrine of intergovernmental tax immunity, codified in 4 USC 111. The West Virginia circuit court ruled in the marshal’s favor, but the West Virginia Supreme Court reversed, holding the statutory scheme constitutional.

Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert, No. 17-1094: Whether the Ninth Circuit erred by holding—in conflict with decisions by the Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Seventh, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits—that equitable exceptions apply to mandatory claim-processing rules and can excuse a party’s failure to timely file a petition for permission to appeal, or a motion for reconsideration, within the deadline under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f).Washington State Department of Licensing v. Cougar Den Inc., No. 16-1498: Whether the Yakama Treaty of 1855 creates a right for tribal members to avoid state taxes on off-reservation commercial activities that make use of public highways.Dawson v. Steager, No. 17-419: Whether the doctrine of intergovernmental tax immunity, as codified in 4 U.S.C. §111, prohibits the State of West Virginia from exempting from state taxation the retirement benefits of certain former state law-enforcement officers, without providing the same exemption for the retirement benefits of former employees of the United States Marshals Service.Republic of Sudan v. Harrison, No. 16-1094: Whether the Second Circuit erred by holding—in direct conflict with the D.C., Fifth, and Seventh Circuits and in the face of an amicus brief from the United States—that plaintiffs suing a foreign state under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act may serve the foreign state under 28 U.S.C §1608(a)(3) by mail addressed and dispatched to the head of the foreign state’s ministry of foreign affairs “via” or in “care of” the foreign state’s diplomatic mission in the United States, despite U.S. obligations under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations to preserve mission inviolability.Bistek v. Berryhill, No. 17-1183: Whether a vocational expert’s testimony can constitute substa