Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/17-494_j4el.pdf
Page Number: 30.0

Cite as:  585 U. S. ____ (2018) 

1 

THOMAS, J., concurring 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 17–494 
_________________ 

SOUTH DAKOTA, PETITIONER v. WAYFAIR, INC., 

ET AL. 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF

 SOUTH DAKOTA
 

[June 21, 2018] 

JUSTICE THOMAS, concurring. 
Justice  Byron  White  joined  the  majority  opinion  in 
National Bellas Hess, Inc. v. Department of Revenue of Ill., 
386 U. S. 753 (1967).  Twenty-five years later, we had the 
opportunity to overrule Bellas Hess in Quill Corp. v. North 
Dakota, 504 U. S. 298 (1992).  Only Justice White voted to 
do  so.  See  id.,  at  322  (opinion  concurring  in  part  and 
dissenting  in  part).    I  should  have  joined  his  opinion. 
Today,  I  am  slightly  further  removed  from  Quill  than 
Justice  White  was  from  Bellas  Hess.  And  like  Justice 
White,  a  quarter  century  of  experience  has  convinced  me 
that  Bellas  Hess  and  Quill  “can  no  longer  be  rationally 
justified.”  504  U. S.,  at  333.    The  same  is  true  for  this 
Court’s  entire  negative  Commerce  Clause  jurisprudence.
See  Comptroller  of  Treasury  of  Md.  v.  Wynne,  575  U. S. 
___,  ___  (2015)  (THOMAS,  J.,  dissenting)  (slip  op.,  at  1).
Although  I  adhered  to  that  jurisprudence  in  Quill,  it  is 
never  too  late  to  “surrende[r]  former  views  to  a  better
considered  position.”  McGrath  v.  Kristensen,  340  U. S. 
162, 178 (1950) (Jackson, J., concurring).  I therefore join
the Court’s opinion.