Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/17-494_j4el.pdf
Page Number: 22.0

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

17 

Opinion of the Court 

ion of White, J.); and help create the “climate of consumer 
to 
confidence” that facilitates sales, see ibid.  According 
respondents,  it  is  unfair  to  stymie  their  tax-free  solicita­
tion  of  customers.  But  there  is  nothing  unfair  about  re­
quiring  companies  that  avail  themselves  of  the  States’ 
benefits to bear an equal share of the burden of tax collec­
tion.  Fairness dictates quite the opposite result.  Helping
respondents’  customers  evade  a  lawful  tax  unfairly  shifts 
to those consumers who buy from their competitors with a
physical  presence  that  satisfies  Quill—even  one  ware­
house or one salesperson—an increased share of the taxes. 
It  is  essential  to  public  confidence  in  the  tax  system  that
the  Court  avoid  creating  inequitable  exceptions.  This  is 
also  essential  to  the  confidence  placed  in  this  Court’s
Commerce  Clause  decisions.    Yet  the  physical  presence 
rule undermines that necessary confidence by giving some 
online retailers an arbitrary advantage over their competi­
tors who collect state sales taxes. 

In the name of federalism and free markets, Quill does 
harm  to  both.  The  physical  presence  rule  it  defines  has 
limited States’ ability to seek long-term prosperity and has 
prevented market participants from competing on an even 
playing field. 

IV 
“Although  we  approach  the  reconsideration  of  our  deci­
sions with the utmost caution, stare decisis is not an inex­
orable command.”  Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U. S. 223, 233 
(2009)  (quoting  State  Oil  Co.  v.  Khan,  522  U. S.  3,  20 
(1997); alterations and internal quotation marks omitted).
Here, stare decisis can no longer support the Court’s prohi­
bition of a valid exercise of the States’ sovereign power. 

If  it  becomes  apparent  that  the  Court’s  Commerce
Clause  decisions  prohibit  the  States  from exercising  their 
lawful  sovereign  powers  in  our  federal  system,  the  Court
should be vigilant in correcting the error.  While it can be